Natural Science teacher attitudes and Pedagogical Content Knowledge for teaching Botany by Deidré Lombaard 26094585 Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for a Master’s degree in the Faculty of Education, University of Pretoria Supervisor: Dr. A. L. Abrie Co-supervisor: Prof. W. J. Fraser Department: Science, Mathematics and Technology Education February 2015
134
Embed
Natural Science teacher attitudes and Pedagogical Content ...
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Natural Science teacher attitudes and Pedagogical Content Knowledge for teaching Botany
by
Deidré Lombaard
26094585
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for a Master’s degree in the Faculty of
Education, University of Pretoria
Supervisor: Dr. A. L. Abrie
Co-supervisor: Prof. W. J. Fraser
Department: Science, Mathematics and Technology Education
February 2015
i
UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY
This document must be signed and submitted with every essay, report, project,
assignment, dissertation and/or thesis.
Full names of student:.................................................................................................................
1. I understand what plagiarism is and am aware of the University’s policy in this
regard.
2. I declare that this DISSERTATION is my own original work. Where other people’s
work has been used, this has been properly acknowledged and referenced in
accordance with departmental requirements.
3. I have not used work previously produced by another student or any other person to
hand in as my own.
4. I have not allowed, and will not allow, anyone to copy my work with the intention of
passing it off as his or her own work.
SIGNATURE OF STUDENT:..........................................................................
SIGNATURE OF SUPERVISOR:....................................................................
SIGNATURE OF CO-SUPERVISOR:.............................................................
ii
Acknowledgement
To my Lord and heavenly Father: Without You this work would not have been possible.
Thank you for the strength and determination to complete this study.
To my family: Thanks to my parents, who urged me to undertake this study and to Pieter for
your support during this time.
To the participants: Thank you for your participation. Without your input this study would
not have materialised.
To my supervisors: Doctor Abrie and Professor Fraser, thank you for believing in me. A
special thanks to Doctor Abrie who helped me through this study, for all the knowledge I
have gained and everything that I have learnt from you, and your support.
To my editor: Elize Grobler, thank you for the assistance in editing this study.
To the National Research Foundation: Thank you for providing me with a bursary which
assisted me financially and enabled me to complete this study.
iii
Table of Contents
Title Page
List of figures vii
List of tables viii
List of abbreviations ix
List of appendices x
Abstract and keywords 1
Chapter 1: Introduction 2
1.1 Introduction 2
1.1.1 The Learning Area of Natural Sciences 2
1.1.2 Botany in the Grades 4 to 7 Natural Sciences Learning Area 3
1.1.3 Natural Sciences education with reference to PCK 5
1.2 Background and context of the study 7
1.2.1 The role of botany in the South African Natural Sciences curriculum 7
1.2.2 Teaching botany in the Natural Sciences classroom
1.2.2.1 Multiple interacting microworlds
8
9
1.2.3 PCK (Pedagogical Content Knowledge) in the Natural Sciences classroom 9
1.2.4 Context of this study 10
1.3 Problem statement 11
1.4 Rationale 14
1.5 Main research question and sub-questions 15
1.6 Purpose and aims of the study 15
1.7 Declaration of assumptions 16
iv
Chapter 2: Literature Review 18
2.1 Introduction 18
2.2 Botany, the discipline 18
2.3 The state of botany teaching in an International and a South African context 19
2.3.1 Misconceptions in botany teaching and learning 20
2.3.2 Learning Outcomes and Assessment Standards in the South African school
curriculum
21
2.4 Attitudes towards botany teaching and learning 23
2.5 The possible reasons for negativity towards botany teaching 24
2.6 Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) 26
2.6.1 Overview 26
2.6.2 PCK in Natural Sciences teaching 28
2.6.2.1 Teaching strategies and instructional methods 30
2.6.3 Development of science teachers’ PCK 32
2.7 Concluding remarks 34
2.8 Theoretical framework 34
Chapter 3: Research methodology 37
3.1 The research paradigm 37
3.2The research approach and design 40
3.3 Research methods 40
3.3.1 Sampling 40
3.3.2 Data collection 40
3.3.2.1 The data collection process 41
3.3.2.2 The teacher interview protocol (Appendix A) 42
3.3.2.3 The observational protocol (Appendix B) 43
3.3.2.4 The lesson plan documents (Appendix C) 44
3.3.3 Data analysis 44
3.4 Methodological norms 45
3.4.1 Credibility, dependability and trustworthiness 45
3.4.2 The Hawthorne effect 46
3.5 Ethical considerations 47
v
Chapter 4: Presentation of the data 48
4.1 Introduction to the data 48
4.1.1 The research questions 48
4.1.2 The theoretical framework 48
4.1.3 Demographics of participants 49
4.1.4 The data collection timeline 50
4.1.5 Data analysis approach 51
4.1.5.1 Transcribing the interview, class observation
and lesson plan data
51
4.2 Presentation of the data 53
4.2.1 Interview data 53
4.2.1.1 Teacher preferences in Natural Sciences teaching 54
4.2.1.2 General attitudes towards botany and botany teaching 55
4.2.2 Observational data 66
4.2.3 Lesson plan data 71
4.3 Summary of the data 78
4.3.1 Teachers’ interviews and class observations 78
Chapter 5: Discussion and findings 91
5.1 Introduction 91
5.2 The sub-research questions and major themes of the study 91
5.2.1 Zoochauvinism 92
5.2.2 Plant blindness and the importance of botany 93
5.2.3 Botany in the Natural Sciences curriculum 94
5.2.4 Teacher training in botany 96
5.2.5 Teaching strategies and PCK 96
5.2.6 Attitudes and PCK 99
vi
Chapter 6: Conclusion 101
References 106
Appendix A 116
Appendix B 118
Appendix C 120
vii
List of figures
Title Page
Figure 1: Theoretical framework adapted from Magnusson, Krajcik and Borko (1999)
and Rollnick, Bennett, Rhemtula, Dharsy and Ndlovu (2008)
36
Figure 2: Summary of the data collection process 42
viii
List of tables
Title Page
Table 1: Core Knowledge related to botany in the Life and Living, Earth and Beyond, Energy and Change, Matter and Material themes in the Natural Sciences Learning Area (DoE, 2003)
4
Table 2: A modified overview of the characteristics of PCK (Chick & Harris, 2007) 27
Table 3: Summary of the research approach and research design 38
Table 4: Summary of the interview process 43
Table 5: Overview of the observation process 44
Table 6: Preliminary themes and a priori codes emerging from the literature 45
Table 7: Background information of each teacher and school that participated in the study
50
Table 8: Interview, observation and lesson plan dates 50
Table 9: Final themes and sub-themes from the interview, class observations and lesson
plan data
52
Table 10: Teacher A, lesson plan A 72
Table 11: Teacher B, lesson plan B 73
Table 12: Teacher C, lesson plan C 74
Table 13: Teacher D, lesson plan D 75
Table 14: Teacher E, lesson plan E 76
Table 15: Core Knowledge related to botany in the Life and Living, Earth and Beyond,
Energy and Change, Matter and Material themes in the Natural Sciences Learning Area (DoE, 2003)
81
Table 16: Botany core content in the Grades 4 to 7 CAPS curriculum (DoE, 2011) 95
Table 17: The study’s contribution to new findings 104
ix
List of abbreviations
CAPS Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement
DoE Department of Education
FET Further Education and Training
NCS National Curriculum Statement
NS Natural Sciences
PCK Pedagogical Content Knowledge
RNCS Revised National Curriculum Statement
x
List of appendices
Title Page
Appendix A: Teacher interview protocol and transcribed example of interview 116
Appendix B: Observational protocol and example of protocol with researcher’s
reflexive notes
117
Appendix C: Example of a lesson plan document 118
1
Abstract
This South African study investigated a sample of Grade 4 to 7 Natural Sciences teachers’
attitudes towards botany and botany teaching and these teachers’ botany Pedagogical Content
Knowledge (PCK). It explored whether a relationship exists between teachers’ attitudes
towards botany teaching and their PCK. The study provides an overview of international and
South African literature and research on the underrepresentation of botany and the teaching
of botany in Natural Sciences classes. Throughout the study insight is provided on the
universal problems of plant blindness and negative attitudes towards botany and botany
teaching in the Natural Sciences classroom.
Data were collected during teachers’ interviews, class observations and analyses of lesson
plan documents. The results indicated that most teachers harbour negative attitudes towards
botany and botany teaching. There are various reasons for this negativity such as past
experiences in botany training, zoochauvinism and plant blindness. The Pedagogical Content
Knowledge of teachers in this study was insufficient. It was found that teachers’ attitudes
towards botany teaching influence their PCK and teachers’ PCK can, in turn, influence
teacher attitudes towards botany, which can affect the teachers’ ways of teaching.
This study confirms that problems of plant blindness, zoochauvinism and negativity towards
botany and botany teaching that occur elsewhere in the world are also prevalent among South
African teachers. This confirmation casts doubts on Natural Sciences teachers’ botany PCK.
This study adds to the literature on botany teaching and PCK in the South African context.
According to Adler and Reed (2002) and Kriek and Grayson (2009), developing science
teachers’ content knowledge is a vital element in professional development programmes.
Therefore content knowledge should be coupled with teachers’ PCK, in order for them to
teach content knowledge effectively by using a variety of skills and teaching strategies. Kriek
and Grayson (2009) state that there is a need for such professional development programmes
by referring to the results of a South African study that included science and mathematics
teachers. Kriek and Grayson (2009) measured teachers’ professional attitudes which can be
linked to a teacher’s PCK.
In the study conducted by Grayson, Ono, Ngoepe and Kita (2001) it is stated that a diversity
of teachers’ “unprofessional attitudes were widespread, such as coming late to class, not
preparing for class and omitting sections of the syllabus that teachers did not understand”
(Grayson, Ono, Ngoepe & Kita, 2001). It is said that some teachers have the tendency to
ultimately depend on their static content knowledge and strictly follow textbook knowledge
and material (Cochran et al., 1991). Teachers are also not acquainted with methods and
strategies to demonstrate and teach in such a manner that enriches the understanding of
learners (Cochran et al., 1991).
Smith and Neale (1989) and van Driel et al. (1998) in Friedrichsen et al. (2009) emphasise
the importance of PCK development of science teachers. PCK development will train
teachers to be more knowledgeable and understand what they teach , to connect their content
knowledge to their development of PCK. A study by Käpyla et al. (2009) concluded that
teachers with well-developed content knowledge are more prone to focus on content when
teaching, referring to the transmission method. As a result content knowledge had little
influence and support in the presentation of concepts taught in class.
Another study by van Driel et al. (2002) in Friedrichsen et al. (2009) investigated pre-service
teachers’ PCK development with the “macro- and micro-level representations in chemistry”.
They found that with chemistry teachers, PCK developed through teaching practice, by
means of questions posed by learners, marking scripts, contact with learners in class, remarks
34
in assignments and by noticing learners’ attitudes in class. This answers the question of
Friedrichsen et al., (2009) “Do beginning teachers develop topic-specific PCK from teaching
experience alone, without the benefit of reflective teacher education programmes?”. There is
a need to teach PCK as an explicit part of teacher training programmes in order to link
teachers’ content knowledge with their pedagogical knowledge (Käpyla et al., 2009).
2.7. Concluding remarks
The literature reviewed in this study illustrates the paucity of literature in the South African
context of primary school Natural Sciences teachers in teaching botany-related concepts. The
literature presents a small amount of research conducted in the field of attitudes towards
botany in primary schools. Although a considerable amount of research and literature was
completed in the field of PCK of Natural Sciences teachers in divergent disciplines, it is
reported that there is the need to elucidate the PCK of science teachers with a focus on botany
teaching. Therefore this study explores teachers’ attitudes regarding botany in the Natural
Sciences Learning Area studied in the specified Grades 4 to 7, and teachers’ PCK with
reference to botany teaching and whether attitudes and PCK are related.
2.8 Theoretical framework
PCK is considered a workable theoretical framework in this study. This framework enabled
the researcher to explore Natural Sciences teachers’ PCK and their attitudes towards botany
teaching and whether a relationship exists between the attitudes and PCK (Abell, 2007;
Friedrichsen et al., 2009; Magnusson, Krajcik & Borko, 1999).
Figure 1 illustrates the theoretical framework that was used in this study. Figure 1 is a
modified and combined framework from Magnusson, Krajcik and Borko (1999) and
Rollnick, Bennett, Rhemtula, Dharsey and Ndlovu (2008) which is applied to teaching and
learning of botany content. This framework highlights the science teacher’s role in the
Natural Sciences classroom when botany-related concepts are taught. This framework also
serves as a guide when teachers’ botany PCK are compared.
Figure 1 shows that a teacher’s PCK includes teacher knowledge that consists of having
general pedagogical knowledge, knowledge of scientific and botanical content, knowledge of
the Natural Sciences curriculum and teaching in context, knowledge of learners with regard
to misconceptions, of how they learn best and understand best. Teachers who have these
35
domains of knowledge should be able to provide results in terms of various teaching
strategies used in class (Rollnick et al., 2008; Magnusson et al., 1999). Teaching strategies
are used in botany teaching and are referred to as the outcomes of teacher knowledge.
Teaching strategies may include representations in the form of posters, pictures, and live
plants; the integration of technology in class, showing DVDs to learners, using Power Point
presentations; employing hands-on activities to let learners be actively involved in class or
outside the class in the school garden, using live specimens for practical work, using a
constructivistic perspective in class to let learners discover new knowledge, and lastly, using
different forms of assessment, to indicate whether learners have reached the outcomes.
Teachers’ knowledge which consists of the botany teachers’ PCK influence the outcomes of
the teacher’s knowledge, in other words the way in which teachers teach botany.
Teacher attitudes also form part of this theoretical framework, but not part of PCK, and is
seen as a separate entity. A teacher’s attitude towards botany such as displaying
zoochauvinism, plant blindness, enjoyment of botany and his training in botany, could
influence the way in which the teacher teaches.
In this theoretical framework teacher attitudes towards botany and botany teaching can be
influenced by a botany teacher’s PCK, and a botany teacher’s PCK can influence teacher
attitudes. Another influence is that teacher attitudes can consequently influence the way in
which teachers teach botany.
The theoretical framework of this study is applied to the teaching and learning of botany
content.
36
Teacher knowledge
Outcomes of teacher
Knowledge Figure 1: Theoretical framework adapted from Magnusson,
Krajcik and Borko (1999) and Rollnick, Bennett,
Rhemtula, Dharsey and Ndlovu (2008)
Botany teaching
Teaching strategies
Representations and hands-on
activities
Constructivism vs. transmission
teaching
Technology integration
Assessment
influences
influence
PCK
General pedagogical knowledge
Knowledge of scientific and botanical
content
Knowledge of the science curriculum
and context
Knowledge of learner understanding
and misconceptions
Teacher attitudes
Zoochauvinism
Plant blindness
Training in botany and botany
teaching
Importance of botany and botany
teaching strategies in the Natural
Sciences Learning Area
Enjoyment of botany and
teaching botany
influences
37
Chapter 3: Research Methodology
3.1 Research paradigm
An interpretivist paradigm was the best approach to follow. In this study interpretivism
focuses on different forms of reality (Hartley, 2010) and places the focus on people’s lived
experiences and subjective nature of knowledge and understanding. Different teachers’ views
and ways of teaching was the focus.
The researcher followed an interpretivist approach which pursues a worldview where
attitudes are influenced by people’s subjective experiences (Maree, 2010). This study aims to
explore and understand the way in which teachers’ attitudes towards botany are constructed
in their everyday teaching environment and to explore whether there is a relationship between
their attitudes and their PCK. The researcher adopted a general interpretivist perspective,
because this study is based on reality being “socially constructed” and the situation of the
study should be kept in mind to make sense of the findings (Maree, 2010). The research could
make sense of how people, in this case the teachers, build upon their different opinions and
meanings, therefore the researcher gained insight into the research problem and generated
knowledge.
The researcher was also open to another approach, i.e of constructivism. The paradigm of
constructivism is closely related to interpretivism, because of the focus placed on issues of
knowledge (owned by teachers) and how they carry this knowledge across to learners in the
real life environment (Morgan, 2007).
The researcher attempted to stay objective by not forcing her opinion or knowledge on the
teachers and was open to different responses (Morgan, 2007). However as the paradigms of
interpretivism and constructivism are considered to be very broad, this could be seen as a
limitation. It should be borne in mind that the paradigm of interpretivism takes people’s
different worldviews, opinions and attitudes into consideration, which serves as the main
focus in this study. A general overview of the research approach and design can be seen in
Table 3.
38
Research approach
Research design
Research questions
Data source
Data collection
techniques
Data analysis
Qualitative approach
Multiple case study
research design
Main research question:
What is the relationship
between Natural Sciences
teachers’ attitudes towards
botany teaching and their
botany PCK?
Grade 4 to 7,
Natural Sciences
teachers.
One-on-one, , semi-
structured d interviews,
botany classroom
observations and botany
lesson plans.
June 2012
Transcription of
tape-recorded
interview responses.
Summaries of
observations and
lesson plans.
Verification and
linking data.
Thematic
summaries.
Objectives of the sub-research questions
Sub-research question:
What are Grade 4 to 7
Natural Sciences teachers’
attitudes towards botany
teaching and why do teachers
harbour these particular
attitudes?
Grade 4 to 7,
Natural Sciences
teachers.
One-on-one, , semi-
structured interviews.
June to August 2012
Transcription of
tape-recorded
interview responses.
Summaries,
development of
themes, thematic
summaries.
To determine the following:
Teachers’ attitudes towards
botany
Teachers’ attitudes towards
botany teaching
The reasons for teachers’
attitudes towards botany
teaching
39
Table 3: Summary of the research approach and research design
To determine the following:
Teachers’ PCK in terms of
botany teaching
Teachers’ ways, methods and
strategies used when teaching
botany
The reasons for choosing the
specific teaching strategies
Sub-research question:
What PCK do Natural
Sciences teachers use to teach
botany in their classrooms
and why do they choose these
methods?
Grade 4 to 7,
Natural Sciences
teachers.
One-on-one, semi-
structured interviews,
botany classroom
observations , and
botany lesson plans.
June to August 2012
Transcription of
tape-recorded
interview responses.
Summaries of
observations and
lesson plans.
Induction.
Verification and
linking data.
Thematic
summaries.
To determine the following:
Whether teachers’ attitudes
towards botany are related to
their PCK
Sub-research question:
How do teacher attitudes
towards botany teaching
impact their botany PCK?
Grade 4 to 7,
Natural Sciences
teachers.
40
3.2 Research approach and design
The research approach utilized in this study was of a qualitative nature. A qualitative
approach is characterised as a method of inquiry, by making sense of a central phenomenon,
in studying participants in the context of their real life and generating insight of their views in
terms of textual data collection (Cresswel, 2007; Maree, 2010).
A multiple case study research design was selected to facilitate this study’s qualitative
approach. Case study research is described by Bromley (1991:302 and Maree, 2010) as a
“systematic inquiry into an event or a set of related events which aims to describe and explain
the phenomenon of interest”. A number of different data gathering techniques associated with
the case study design are surveys, interviews, document analysis, observation and the
assembling of artefacts (Yin, 1994; Maree, 2010).
In this study a multiple case study research design helped to identify, describe and explain
teachers’ attitudes towards botany teaching and their PCK towards botany teaching and the
relationship between attitudes and PCK. The data gathering techniques associated with this
study’s multiple case study research design were one-on-one teacher interviews, observations
of class lessons and document analysis of lesson plans.
3.3 Research methods
3.3.1 Sampling
The unit of analysis included three purposive selected primary schools in Gauteng with
conveniently available Grade 4 to 7 Natural Sciences teachers. A purposeful method of
homogenous sampling includes teachers who own a particular attribute (Cresswel, 2007), for
example, Grade 4 to 7 Natural Sciences teachers that teach botanical topics as part of the
Natural Sciences curriculum. This homogenous sample of teachers included the number of
two Grade 4 to 7 Natural Sciences teachers per school, from each of the three different
schools. A total number of six teachers became part of the homogenous sample.
3.3.2 Data collection
The qualitative study data collection occurred in the second and third quarters of 2012. A
total number of three schools and six teachers were involved. The following section will give
insight into the data collection process.
41
3.3.2.1 Data collection process
Qualitative data collection in this study included three strategies. The first strategy consisted
of one-on-one semi-structured interviews with a set of predetermined questions to a total
number of six Grade 4 to 7 Natural Sciences teachers, two teachers from each of the three
selected schools. Although interviews are considered as time consuming and costly
(Cresswel, 2007), this seemed to be the most relevant method to collect data, because of the
small number of teachers who participated in the study and because of the personalised nature
of interview data. Only six teachers participated in the interviews for a maximum time of one
hour after school or in their free time. The interview responses were tape recorded for data
collection and analysis purposes only.
Classroom observations served as a useful strategy for data collection. The observations were
done after the interviews. The strategy of classroom observations were chosen because the
researcher wanted to experience the teachers’ attitudes and PCK towards botany teaching
first-hand to compare whether the teachers’ interview responses were reflected in their
classroom teaching. The observational role most suited for this study was the role of a non-
participant observer who did not interfere with activities and did not participate in the
teaching.
The other data collection strategy used in this study was document analysis, which consisted
of examining botany-related lesson plans designed by the Natural Sciences teachers. The
advantage of collecting documents throughout this study was that the lesson plans were
designed by the teachers themselves and information was stated in their own words
(Cresswel, 2007). Botany-related lesson plans were collected from five of the Grade 4 to 7
Natural Sciences teachers from the three selected schools. One of the teachers decided not to
participate in the observation, therefore no lesson plan was submitted. A summary of the data
collection process can be seen in Figure 2.
42
Figure 2: Summary of the data collection process
3.3.2.2 Teacher interview protocol (Appendix A)
One-on-one semi-structured interviews were conducted with two Grade 4 to 7 Natural
Sciences teachers from each of the three schools, in their free time, after school or in a free
period as preferred by the teacher. The interview did not take longer than half an hour. These
interviews were completed in the second quarter of 2012. A total of six interviews were
conducted during this study. The interview schedule (Appendix A) and the interviews were
conducted in Afrikaans, the language preferred by the teachers. The interview responses were
translated into English during transcription and data analysis.
Interview questions were clearly stated and understandable, however, some questions were
rephrased if the participant did not understand. The protocol contained administrative
information regarding the time and place of the interview, biographical information and
interview questions which explored teachers’ attitudes towards their botany PCK. Questions
ranged in content from the teachers’ attitudes towards botany, prior study experience with
botany teaching, knowledge of the curriculum and the PCK held by these teachers in terms of
teaching and assessment strategies and whether there might be a relationship between
Strategy used Objective
1. One-on-one semi-structured
teacher interviews revealed
teacher attitudes
(v
3. Lesson plan documents
revealed teaching
2. Class observations
revealed teacher attitudes
To determine teachers’
attitudes towards botany,
botany teaching and
teachers’ PCK
To determine teachers’
planning of a botany
lesson, content, resources
and PCK
To determine teachers’
PCK and to observe their
teaching strategies in
botany teaching
43
teachers’ attitudes towards botany and their PCK. A summary of the interview process is
stated in Table 4.
Table 4: Summary of the interview process
Purpose of the semi-structured interviews
To determine teachers’ attitudes
towards botany and botany
teaching, including:
Preferences in Natural
Sciences teaching.
The Natural Sciences
Curriculum.
Past botany training and
experiences.
To determine teachers’ ways of
botany teaching in the Natural
Sciences class, including:
Teaching strategies
used when teaching
botany.
The importance of these
teaching strategies.
Learner understanding.
Assessment strategies.
The use of practical
examples and
technology when
teaching botany.
To determine the relationship
between teachers’ attitudes
towards botany teaching and
teachers’ PCK:
To determine whether
the teachers’ attitudes
towards botany
teaching have an effect
on their teaching.
3.3.2.3 Observational protocol (Appendix B)
Observations of botany-related lessons took place with five teachers in total, in other words,
one observation per teacher. Only five teachers participated, as one teacher decided not to
participate in the observation process. The five teachers were observed for a period of
approximately 30 minutes per class. The observations occurred during the third quarter of
2012. Identifying information on the observational protocol included demographic
information such as the classroom number, the name of the observer, the role of the observer
and the estimated time of the observation, together with a checklist of various aspects related
to the classroom environment, teaching and lesson detail. Descriptive field notes were also
recorded during these observations. The descriptive field notes included own reflections such
as ideas, experiences, opinions and views held by the researcher. An overview of the
observation process is provided in Table 5.
44
Table 5: Overview of the observation process
Objective Key aspects in the observations
To describe Natural Sciences teachers’
botany PCK.
Teaching strategies.
Assessment strategies.
Classroom environment.
Teachers’ content knowledge.
Class lesson presentation.
Learner misconceptions.
To verify the teachers’ interview responses. Beliefs, values and attitudes promoted
in class when teaching botany.
To determine whether the teachers’ attitudes
towards botany teaching has an effect on
their PCK.
Beliefs, values and attitudes towards
botany teaching.
PCK.
3.3.2.4 Lesson plan documents (Appendix C)
Document analysis of the botany-related lesson plans were obtained from five of the six
teachers in this study. All six teachers were firstly interviewed and thereafter asked for a copy
of a botany-related lesson plan which served as the teacher’s guideline to the specific botany
lesson taught in the Natural Sciences class during the observation. These documents were
obtained from the teachers during the third quarter of 2012. These documents served as a
helpful aid in comparing the teachers’ interview responses with the observations of their
actual teaching..
3.3.3 Data analysis
Qualitative interview data that were collected from the six teachers’ interviews were
transcribed to textual data. A preliminary exploratory analysis gave the researcher an overall
idea of the data (Cresswel, 2007). A preliminary set of a priori codes and themes for data
analysis was identified from the literature with reference to the research questions in this
study. This set of codes and themes (Table 6), was planned prior to the analysis, other codes
and themes emerged during the latter part of this study and can be seen in Chapter 4.
45
The interview data and the observation protocols and lesson plan documents were coded
using these a priori codes. Data and findings are presented in Chapter 4. Narrative discussions
are provided and are related to the final themes and research questions.
Table 6: Preliminary themes and a priori codes emerging from the literature.
Themes or research questions A priori codes
Teacher attitudes toward botany teaching.
Teacher experiences with botany in past
training and current teaching.
Zoochauvinism.
Plant blindness.
Importance of botany in the classroom.
PCK held by teachers when teaching botany.
Knowledge of content.
Teaching strategies.
Awareness of learner understanding.
Knowledge of the curriculum.
Measures of assessment.
The relationship between teacher attitudes
and other aspects of PCK.
These codes will emerge during the
document analysis process, to validate
whether teachers’’ attitudes are related to
their PCK.
3.4 Methodological norms
3.4.1 Credibility, dependability and trustworthiness
Credibility is an indication that the conclusions from data collected in terms of interviews,
observations and lesson plan documents are accurate (Maree, 2010). Credibility of this
study’s interview protocol, observational protocol and lesson plan documents were
established by sharing these instruments among academics from the University of Pretoria,
and the teachers to assure the content validity of the interview protocol, observational
protocol and lesson plan documents. Stakeholder checks also enhance credibility when other
parties or individuals with interest in and knowledge of this study remark on the findings
(Maree, 2010).
46
Maree (2010) defines dependability as follows: “Dependability refers to the degree to which
the reader can be convinced that the findings did indeed occur as the researcher says they
did”. In order to validate responses and ensure the dependability of these responses, each
teacher who was interviewed was asked to provide the researcher with a botany-related
lesson plan and to allow the researcher to attend a class where the application of these lesson
plan documents was observed. Observations validated the interview responses and
contributed to the trustworthiness of the data collected.
Trustworthiness indicates whether the researcher is able to persuade the audience that the
findings in the study are worth paying attention to and that the research is of high quality
(Maree, 2010). Dependability and trustworthiness of the qualitative collected data were
established through member checking (Cresswel, 2007), where the researcher in this study
restated and summarised the responses of the participants after each question, in order for
them to validate and correct the researcher’s understanding of what was said (Maree, 2010).
In this study trustworthiness was established by means of utilizing various data sources
(Maree, 2010). The researcher triangulated the interview, observational and lesson plan
document data to validate emerging themes and to establish whether these themes were
useful to this study and appropriate to use.
The researcher endeavoured to eliminate bias in the study with the help of reflective notes
held during the investigation (Maree, 2010). Interviews were conducted and tape recorded.
3.4.2 The Hawthorne effect
During this study the Hawthorne effect was taken into account. The Hawthorne effect refers
to a situation where participants might change the way in which they act in their daily lives
due to the presence of the researcher, in providing false answers to questions to present
themselves in a good or bad way (Maree, 2010 and McMillan and Schumacher, 2001).
The Hawthorne effect might have been present during the interviewing process; however
teachers were asked to give their honest responses. The Hawthorne effect was taken into
consideration during the observation process, where descriptive and reflective field notes
accompanied the situations of the classroom environments described in Chapter 4. The
Hawthorne effect might have been eliminated by validating and triangulating the interview
responses with the classroom observations and by validating the classroom observations with
the lesson plan documents.
47
3.5 Ethical considerations
Ethics clearance was sought and obtained from the Ethics Committee of the University of
Pretoria prior to data collection. The researcher adhered to ethical principles towards
research. The main ethical principles are informed consent, safety, privacy and trust. The
researcher followed the principles of voluntary participation in research, implying that the
participants could withdraw from the research at any time. Informed consent was sought and
research participants were at all times fully informed about the research process and
purposes. The teachers gave consent to their participation in the research. Safety in
participation was also adhered to and human respondents were not placed at risk or harm of
any kind. The issue of privacy was adhered to, where confidentiality and anonymity of
human respondents were protected at all times. Pseudonyms were used in the teacher
interviews and for documents collected. Trust of participants was throughout respected
which implies that human participants were not subjected to any acts of deception or betrayal
in the research process or its published outcomes.
Permission was obtained from the Gauteng Department of Education to conduct research in
the selected primary schools in this province. Thereafter informed consent was obtained from
each headmaster in each of the three schools that formed part of the sample. Once permission
was obtained from these authorities, Informed Consent Documents were sent to the Grade 4
to 7 Natural Sciences teachers to request their consent for participation in this research study.
The Informed Consent Documents consisted of a description of the research study,
biographical information of the researcher, the supervisor of the study and the University of
Pretoria. The duration of the interviews and the tape recordings of responses were stated in
the consent documents. It was also stated that all participants were free to refuse
participation and that participation could be withdrawn at any time. The informed consent
documents consisted of a cover page with relevant information and a consent form which
required the participants’ names, signatures and dates.
In this chapter all techniques, methods and processes of data collection and analysis and the
ethical considerations for this study were described. In Chapter 4 the data will be presented
and discussed by referring to the teachers’ interview responses, class observations and lesson
plan documents.
48
Chapter 4: Presentation of the data
4.1 Introduction to the data
In this chapter an overview of the data is presented by discussing the demographics of
participants and describing the data analysis approach that was used. The data is presented in
terms of each sub-research question and theme. Interview data, observation data and lesson
plan data form part of this chapter. Discussion of the data will follow in Chapter 5.
4.1.1 The research questions
The following main research question formed the basis of this study where the sub-research
questions facilitated data collection for the main research question.
The main research question:
What is the relationship between Natural Sciences teachers’ attitudes towards botany
teaching and their botany PCK?
The sub-research questions:
What are Grade 4 to 7 Natural Sciences teachers’ attitudes towards botany teaching
and why do teachers harbour these particular attitudes?
What PCK do Natural Sciences teachers use to teach botany in their classrooms and
why do teachers choose these methods?
How do teachers’ attitudes towards botany teaching impact their botany PCK?
4.1.2 The theoretical framework
The data are discussed in relation to the theoretical framework. The theoretical framework of
this study, as stated in Chapter 2, page 36, was adapted from Magnusson, Krajcik and Borko
(1999) and Rollnick et al. (2008) and applied to botany teaching and learning.
49
4.1.3 Demographics of participants
Six teachers from three schools formed part of this study, two teachers from each school.
Five of the teachers were females. All the schools had different socio-economical statuses
and resource availability. The researcher divided the three schools into resource rich schools,
medium resourced and medium to low resourced schools. The resource rich school had an
abundance of resources such as a fully equipped laboratory with a projector and television
and videos to show to the learners. The medium resourced school also showed resource
availability such as a projector, but had no laboratory. It had a classroom, which was used
for Natural Sciences teaching, but also used for teaching of other Learning Areas. The
medium to low resourced school had a laboratory, but it was not as fully equipped. The
reason why this school was viewed as medium to low resourced was because there was no
updated science equipment, or projectors, and also no television as resource, because the
school was situated in a high crime area. Pseudonyms were given to the teachers and to the
different schools.
Each of the six teachers participated in the interviews held at the various schools. Only f ive
teachers participated in the observations of classroom teaching and the provision of lesson
plans. Only three of the five teachers provided the researcher with a complete lesson plan, in
other words a lesson plan set up and structured by the school and the teacher. The rest of the
teachers handed the researcher the learners’ notes that were copied from the textbook and
from worksheets that were routinely regarded as lesson plans by the teachers. The grade of
instruction ranged from Grade 4 to 7. Table 7 provides a summary of the demographics of the
teacher participants.
50
Table 7: Background information of each teacher and school that participated in the study
School and pseudonym Gender Grade of
instruction
Description
of each school
Data collection strategy
Interview Observation Complete
lesson
plan
Teacher A school A
TEACHER A
F Grade 4 Resource rich
school.
Teacher B school A
TEACHER B
F Grade 7 Resource rich
school.
Teacher A school B
TEACHER C
F Grade 7 Medium
resourced
school.
Notes
Teacher B school B
TEACHER D
M Grade 4 Medium
resourced
school.
Notes
Teacher A school C
TEACHER E
F Grade 4 Medium to-
low resourced
school.
Teacher B school C
TEACHER F
F Grade 7 Medium to
low resourced
school.
4.1.4 The data collection timeline
Data collection took place in the second and third quarters of 2012. Table 8 provides an
overview of the data collection timeline.
Table 8: Interview, observation and lesson plan dates
Activity Participants Date
Interviews Teachers A to F June to July 2012
Observations Teachers A to E July to August 2012
Lesson plan documents Teachers A to E July to August 2012
51
4.1.5 Data analysis approach
Data analysis took place from June 2012 to February 2013. Interview responses were
transcribed and the classroom observations and lesson plan field notes were summarised by
the researcher.
4.1.5.1 Transcribing the interview, class observation and lesson pl an data
Interview responses were transcribed and then translated from each tape recording and saved
by the researcher as transcripts in Word document files. The translated interview schedule
(Appendix A) consists of a table with the interview questions and responses, codes and
themes (Cresswel, 2007). In Chapter 3 a set of a priori codes and themes were shown in
Table 7, however as the study progressed and during data analysis a new set of themes and
codes was compiled. The interview responses were categorised into different codes, whereas
the codes were grouped under each theme. The themes were formulated to answer the
research questions and were based on the theoretical framework of the study. The final
themes and sub-themes were extracted from the data and are provided in Table 9.
52
Table 9: Final themes and sub-themes from the interview, class observations and lesson plan data.
Research question Theme Description Sub-themes
What are Grade 4 to 7 Natural
Sciences teachers’ attitudes
towards botany teaching and why
do the teachers harbour these
particular attitudes?
1. Teacher attitudes towards botany teaching Natural Sciences teachers’ personal beliefs and
attitudes regarding botany teaching in the Natural
Sciences Learning Area, Grade 4 to 7
Preferences in Natural Sciences teaching
(Zoochauvinism)
General attitudes towards botany and
botany teaching
Difficulty in teaching botany
Plant blindness
Importance of botany and botany teaching
2. Botany content in the curriculum * The prominence of botanical concepts in the Grade
4 to 7 syllabus, according to Natural Sciences
teachers *
The old curriculum versus the current
curriculum and CAPS
Content detail *
3. Teacher training in terms of botany * Teachers’ past teacher training in botany whether at
university or college *
Lack of botany training *
Enjoyment of botany
Teachers’ preferences of Learning Areas*
What PCK do Natural Sciences
teachers use to teach botany in the
Natural Sciences classrooms and
why do the teachers choose these
methods?
4. Teaching strategies and PCK towards
botany teaching
Teachers’ methods , strategies and different ways
in which botanical concepts are taught for
maximum understanding
Types of teaching strategy
Technology integration in botany
teaching *
Importance of teaching strategies *
The role of the teacher and assessment *
How do teachers’ attitudes
towards botany impact their
botany PCK?
5. Relationship between teachers’ attitudes
and PCK
Whether teachers’ attitudes towards a subject in a
Learning Area has an impact on the teachers’ ways
of teaching, i.e. their teaching strategies
Effects on teaching
Attitudes
PCK *
All themes, descriptions and sub-themes refer to a priori categories, except the new themes marked with *
53
The themes presented in Table 9 were either a priori themes identified from the literature, or
new themes identified from the data. These themes will be discussed later in this chapter and
will elaborate on the data gathered from the interviews, observations and lesson plan
documents.
Five botany lesson observations took place during Natural Sciences periods whilst the
teachers taught botany lessons. The researcher’s role was strictly non-participatory; the
researcher did not interfere with the lessons. The length of each observation was
approximately 30 minutes. The observational protocol’s layout contained a section for
descriptive field notes which described the classroom environment, the duration of the lesson,
the use of teaching strategies, the use of plants as examples, learner misconceptions and
learner activities completed in the class after the lesson (Appendix B). Reflexive field notes
included the researcher’s opinion based on the events in the class and literature studied.
The lesson plan documents (Appendix C) were summarised in tables to extract useful
information such as the teachers’ descriptions of the lessons, the use of resources, Learning
Area integration, the learning outcomes for the lessons and assessment used during or after
the lessons.
4.2 Presentation of the data
In the following section data is presented according to the responses to the interview
questions (Appendix A). The lesson observations are presented according to the way in which
the teachers taught the lessons by referring to the researchers’ field notes and the teachers’
lesson plan documents. The lesson plan documents are further presented according to the way
in which botany lessons were prepared and the content of the lesson plans. Data is
collectively presented according to the research questions and themes of this study.
4.2.1 Interview data
Different teachers’ interview responses are presented by referring to the sub-research
questions of this study and the themes and sub-themes identified from the data.
Sub-research question 1: What are Grade 4 to 7 Natural Sciences teachers’ attitudes towards
botany teaching and why do teachers harbour these particular attitudes?
Theme 1: Teacher attitudes towards botany teaching.
54
4.2.1.1 Teacher preferences in Natural Sciences teaching
Teachers were asked about their favourite topics and those that they dislike to teach.
Teacher A disliked teaching the theme of Matter and Material, because of its abstract nature.
Teacher A stated that teaching that theme was difficult because learners did not like it and
they could not relate it to their daily lives. Teacher A stated that learners had to rote learn
this theme. Teacher B could not state a theme of less preference. Teacher C disliked the
Earth and Beyond theme. Teacher C stated that learners struggled with the terminology in
this strand. Teacher F disliked teaching the plant and animal cell to Grade 7 learners, because
learners struggled with the terminology and the lack of resources at this school where only
two microscopes were provided by the Department of Education.
Teachers D and E both disliked teaching about plants. Teacher E’s response was: “Uhm... I
don’t like the plant thing, it is boring.” The reason provided was that learners did not find it
interesting and because they did not enjoy it, the teacher also did not enjoy it. Teacher E
added that “we see plants everyday” and that learners would rather learn about different
animals. Teacher D responded that we could not touch plants in the way we touch animals,
that plants do not talk back and that plants are there “every day” Teachers D and E struggled
to enjoy botany and botany teaching. Teacher E added that developing a “love” for plants was
difficult.
Teachers A, B, C and F preferred teaching the theme of Life and Living because learners
could relate to it, and therefore the four teachers found it easier to teach. Teacher A also
preferred to teach about animals and water, because animals move, therefore learners
enjoyed animals. Teacher C did not have a preference. Teacher C stated her preferences for
plants, animals and the human body, but contradicted her statement later on during the
interview by stating that she loved to teach about the human body. Teacher F also preferred
to teach about animals, because she could bring animals to class to show the learners.
Teacher F added that she enjoyed plants.
Teacher D and E both preferred to teach about outer space, because of the “x factor”, and
stated that it was “something else”. Teacher D was fascinated by outer space and stated that
he showed learners DVDs on the topic.
55
4.2.1.2 General attitudes towards botany and botany teaching
The interviewed teachers’ attitudes can be presented in two sub-themes:
plant blindness and the importance of botany and teaching thereof.
Plant blindness
Wandersee and Schussler (1998) refer to plant blindness as “the inability to see or notice the
plants in one’s own environment”, which could cause the failure to see the importance of
plants in the environment, lack of appreciation towards plants and zoochauvinism.
Teachers A, D, E and F showed plant blindness, because of the common idea of plants being
invisible, less important than animals, uninteresting and just part of the background.
Teacher A stated that she loved Natural Sciences, but found plants boring, she preferred to
teach about animals, because they “move”, she also stated that she could relate more to
animals, that learners see plants as non-living and that plants did not react like animals do;
“they are not emotional”. Teacher D also enjoyed the Learning Area of Natural Sciences,
but felt that plants were not as enjoyable as animals, because animals were more
interactive. Teacher D emphasised throughout the interview that “to develop a love for plants
is difficult, that you will develop it over time, if you understand it.” Teacher E added that she
did not enjoy Natural Sciences in general and did not want to teach this subject in 2013.
Teacher F preferred to teach about animals, because of the diversity and because she could
physically bring them to class; she then described her attitude towards botany teaching as
“more or less positive”.
The importance of botany and botany teaching
The importance of botany and botany teaching were prominent topics of discussion between
Teachers B and D only. Teacher B in general did not reveal a lot about her attitude towards
botany and the teaching thereof, but she stated that she preferred teaching about plants and
animals, because they were parts of our lives. Teacher D repeatedly emphasised the
importance of botany and botany teaching during the interview. Teacher D preferred not to
teach about plants or soil, but acknowledged the importance of plants and soil and that soil
gave “essence to plants”. She also referred to photosynthesis and the fact that it provided
us with oxygen.
56
Most of the teachers reported that botany content could be difficult for learners to learn.
They also found that botany teaching was a difficult task. Teacher A stated that she
understood botany, but that teaching botany to Grade 4s was a very difficult task, because
of the difficult terminology. Teacher A stated that photosynthesis was a very difficult
concept to teach, because of new terminology and the fact that learners could not relate to it,
although she tried to make botany fun. Teacher C felt that botany was more difficult than
zoology. Teacher E clearly stated that botany was difficult and that you needed to be a
subject specialist in order to teach that section in the Learning Area. Teacher E also found
Natural Sciences a difficult Learning Area to teach. She had preconceptions about Natural
Sciences being an interesting Learning Area, but found that it consisted of a lot of work and
research.
Later on in the interview Teacher E contradicted her previous statement by saying that
“plants are easy”, and learners loved practicals. Here, Teacher E did not specifically refer to
practicals about plants, but to practicals in general. Teacher F, however, stated that botany
was not difficult, because you could use practical examples when teaching that section; she
added that when she prepared and used resources they were helpful. Teacher D’s previous
statement could be of use here: “You develop a love for plants over time, if you understand
it.”
Theme 2: Botany content in the Natural Sciences curriculum.
The old curriculum vs the new curriculum vs CAPS in terms of botany content
Teachers A and F felt very strongly that the old curricula, Curriculum 2005 and the Revised
National Curriculum Statement [(RNCS) DoE, 2002], had more detail on botany-related
concepts and content. Teachers A and F added that the current curriculum, National
Curriculum Statement [(NCS) DoE, 2003], had too little relevant detail on botany and that
botany was “rushed”. Teacher A taught Grade 4 Natural Sciences and stated that in the NCS
(DoE, 2003) there was a lack of time to complete topics, she referred to the situation as “too
much, too little”. Teacher A also observed that Grade 4’s started with botany when they
entered Grade 4, they struggled with the subject and therefore carried a negative connection
to botany from then onwards. Teacher A had a child in Grade 3 who started with the CAPS
(DoE, 2011) curriculum in 2012, she noticed that CAPS (DoE, 2011) placed more emphasis
on botany and that it contained greater detail. Teacher A added that plants were taught for a
very short while in the year, only in the first quarter.
57
Teacher F stated that she added more information during her lessons than that which was
provided in the textbooks. She felt that the textbooks lacked information and that the NCS
(DoE, 2003) combined different themes such as the Life and Living theme with the Earth
and Beyond theme, which could be very confusing.
Teachers B, C and D felt the current curriculum placed insufficient emphasis on botany.
Teacher C stated that there was too much information on plant structure and too little general
information about plants such as their role in the environment, also that there was a lot of
information on botany in Grade 7. On the other hand Teacher D stated that there was too
much information on soil, therefore she chose not to follow the Natural Sciences work
schedule.
With regard to content detail, Teachers B and F stated the botany section did not provide
sufficient detail. Teacher F added that the only detailed section was on plant growth and the
curriculum required insufficient detail on indigenous and exotic plants. Botany was a small
section of the work, however she sometimes omitted it, because there was not enough time
to complete the section and it caused “chaos”, when she had to rush to other topics. Teacher
F added that the curriculum required learners to study plants at wrong times of the year, for
example when no flowers were available in winter, the work schedule stated that flowers
had to be taught. Teacher E felt there was enough information on botany and that the
section on plant reproduction went into enough detail.
Theme 3: Teacher training experiences.
This theme is concerned with the level of enjoyment of botany content in past training and
the fact that some of the teachers did not receive botany training.
Enjoyment of botany during teacher training
Teachers A, B, and C admitted that they did not enjoy botany as part of their teacher training.
During her training, Teacher A found botany very difficult and she stated that she could
relate more to animals and enjoyed zoology more than botany, because of good lecturers who
made zoology interesting. Teacher B stated that she had positive botanical training, but she
did not enjoy botany; however, she added that the positive training was because of a good
teacher: “Very positive, because I had a wonderful teacher”. Then later on Teacher B stated
that she enjoyed zoology more, because it was more interesting than botany. Teacher C stated
that she enjoyed zoology more, because of fun excursions: “The excursions were very nice!”
58
The reasons for the enjoyment of botany were not related to the intrinsic love for botany, but
to other factors such as the quality of teaching. Teachers D, E and F could not answer the
questions related to this theme, because they did not receive training in botany.
Lack of training in botanical content
Teachers A, B and C received training in botanical content, but Teachers D, E and F received
no botanical training at a tertiary institution. However, because it had been expected of them
to teach botany, they developed experience in the subject. Teacher B was trained as a
consumer studies teacher and stated that she only had training in biology. Teacher D was
trained as a history teacher. Teacher E was trained as a language teacher and Teacher F was
an art teacher. All these teachers were teaching botany in Natural Sciences. Teacher D,
being a history teacher, stated that he was enjoying Natural Sciences as a Learning Area at
that moment, but that he had no botany training. Teacher D only had teaching experience in
Natural Sciences in general, but not specifically in botany. Teacher E had no training in
botany and was a language teacher, she only taught Natural Sciences because of the
classroom location. Teacher E wanted the bigger classroom, so the Learning Area came with
the class! She also stated that she received help from her colleagues in teaching Natural
Sciences. Teacher F stated that she had actually been an art teacher: “I am an art teacher, art
is my passion and I like to draw plants and animals, that is the nearest that I have come to
plants in training.” Teachers who had no or little training in botany or even in science
teaching were appointed to teach Natural Sciences.
Sub-research question 2: What PCK do Natural Sciences teachers use to teach botany in
their classrooms and why do teachers choose these methods?
Theme 4: Teaching strategies and PCK in botany teaching.
Teaching strategies
Teacher A:
Teacher A taught Grade 4 Natural Sciences. She liked to teach visual lessons by showing
the learners pictures, practical examples and she likes to draw upon associations. She felt
practical examples helped the learners realise that plants were living organisms. She
demonstrated one practical activity per quarter while the learners observed. Videos were
available in the media centre, but there was no television in the class, however there was a
59
television in the media centre. Teacher A stated that she did not show the learners any videos
in the media centre, because of extra arrangements that had to be made. Teacher A did
however mention that she would like to show the learners videos and “stuff on the computer,
because learners react more to technology”. She summarised work from the textbook and
stated that the textbook had “nice” pictures that helped the learners to remember the work.
Teacher A also asked the learners questions in class. “They want to tell you stories”. She
added that this was how the learners learn from one another. There were pictures about
photosynthesis that showed associations for example a picture of a camera to remember the
word “photosynthesis”. Teacher A took the learners out onto the schoolyard , but she would
have liked to have more time to do that and to do more practicals. Teacher A felt that you
could not have a “proper” lesson without using resources, because the learners would lose
interest. The teaching strategies used by Teacher A: question and answer sessions, textbook
narrative, associations and practical examples in the school environment.
Teacher B:
Teacher B taught Grade 7 Natural Sciences. She was an experienced teacher who preferred
to link the learners’ prior knowledge to new concepts and to use practical examples like the
parts of plants under the microscope. Teacher B stated that she regularly told the learners
about something related to Natural Sciences and botany that was shown on television or
mentioned in the news. “To keep their attention is very difficult”. Teacher B did not show
the learners any videos, because of the lack of time and facilities. Teacher B mentioned that
she showed the learners posters that she had in her storeroom. She did not like to work
straight from the textbook, because: “The new textbooks are more play time rather than study
time”. She added that the use of different teaching strategies would help learners understand
the work better than when only using textbooks. “They want to see the real thing, it is like
monkey see monkey do”. Teacher B also bought fruit to show the learners parts of the plants
we eat. She said that practicals were difficult, because of the lack of discipline. She
normally drew on the board and showed the learners posters. The teaching strategies used by
Teacher B: practical examples, posters, demonstrations and the transmission method,
narratives.
Teacher C:
Teacher C taught Grade 7 Natural Sciences. She preferred to demonstrate the work to
learners and mentioned that learners had to see plants; therefore she showed the learners
60
pictures to help them understand a topic. Teacher C added that learners had to feel science:
“That is why they like the human body so much, because they can feel it. A child has to feel
science”. She also regarded question and answer sessions a method of keeping the learners’
attention in class: “I ask them questions on what they think and then I build on their prior
knowledge, that they experience it first”. Teacher C showed the learners videos and pictures
and brought seeds to class. She felt that learners need to observe on a visual level:
“Especially today’s learners, they have to be actively involved”. The researcher asked the
question: “Would you say that plants are interesting to teach?” Teacher C answered by
stating: “It depends, because with fungi, they look it up on the internet.” Here teacher C
stated that she also learnt from the learners. Teacher C (if her statement on plants is
considered), stated that plants were not really interesting and she referred to fungi as plants.
Teacher C stated that she gave learners a topic to research and she preferred to add to the
learners’ previous knowledge. She also mentioned that learners struggled with plants,
because they did not “notice plants and how they function around them”, which could be
recognised as one of the characteristics of plant blindness. Teaching strategies used by
Teacher C: question and answer sessions, narratives, practical examples, videos, research in
groups and the transmission method.
Teacher D:
Teacher D taught Grade 7 Natural Sciences and described himself as an “old school teacher”
who liked to use his overhead projector and showed the learners pictures while teaching. He
did not believe in bringing plants to class, because he felt you could not bring animals to
class, they would get harmed. He also did not want soil in his class and on the learners’
books. He took learners out only on special occasions, but admitted that it was better for
them to see the “real thing”. He believed that you could show learners more by using
pictures than you could show them outside. This teacher mentioned that he lost the learners’
interest when he taught botany. He encouraged learners to look at the leaves outside and
believed that it would help develop their thinking skills and encouraged them to ask
questions. “Visual aids are very important, otherwise it is a dead lesson. You cannot stand in
front of the class and talk and not show them how something works”. Teaching strategies
used by Teacher D: transmission method, narratives, question and answering sessions, no
use of practical examples.
61
Teacher E:
Teacher E taught Grade 4 Natural Sciences. When the researcher asked her to describe her
teaching strategies, the researcher had to explain what teaching strategies were. She stated
that she used posters, showed the learners videos and used practical examples, took them
outside and actively kept them busy. She added: “I use anything”. She believed that it was
very important to use visual strategies and that the learners had to touch the plants and the
soil: “If not they don’t understand”. The teaching strategies used by Teacher E: posters,
videos, practical examples and Power Point presentations, which is mainly audiovisual.
Teacher F:
Teacher F taught Grade 5 and Grade 7 Natural Sciences. She was a very experienced
teacher. She preferred to do practicals (not only botany-related practicals): “I love practicals,
I let them see, touch and smell”. The learners wrote notes in their observation books during
the practical. Teacher F mentioned that the learners enjoyed the “starch and glucose tests”
because of the colour changes that they observed. “I have a lot of apparatus, so I pack it out
and they work together in groups”. The learners often went outside to collect seeds and she
mentioned that the learners like it, because it was something new to them. She believed that
different teaching strategies were important, because the different strategies motivated the
learners to think. This teacher often observed the learners outside during break and noticed
how they looked at and observed different plants. The learners also worked in groups, and
whilst the teacher demonstrated during a practical, the learners watched. Teaching strategies
used by Teacher F: demonstrations, transmission method, demonstration and practical
activities.
Teachers A, B, C and E used a similar range of teaching strategies, from the traditional
transmission method to the use of practical examples and demonstrations. Teacher D did not
make use of practical examples, but Teacher F made use of practical activities and
demonstrations. Teachers B and E pointed out that they believed the learners had to touch
plants to understand them. It seems that all the experienced teachers preferred to use their old
traditional teaching strategies and did not like to deviate from them. The resource availability
in each school also played a role in the teachers’ choice of teaching strategies.
62
The role of the teacher and assessment
Teacher A stated that she asked the learners a question then provided the learners firstly
with an informal written assessment and thereafter a formal written worksheet. She stated that
she explained the worksheet over and over again. “So basically it is about repetition,
repetition, repetition”. She stated that she handed the learners projects, tests and exams,
which were mostly completed in class. When the learners completed an “experiment” or
practical task they had to complete a worksheet. Worksheets were the major form of
assessment.
Teacher B stated that she repeated topics over and over again. She also asked questions. “I
try to tell them for example; a dicot seed has two cotyledons, like a brain has two lobes”, a
useful anthropomorphic reference. Informal question and answering sessions, worksheets and
tests were methods of assessment in Teacher B’s botany class. Teacher B conducted
“experiments” or rather practical tasks with the learners, but she did not allocate marks for
these tasks. “It is very difficult, because of the lack of discipline”. Teacher B mainly used
both formative and summative assessment.
Teacher C stated that she preferred to give the learners short assessments. If there was
something the learners did not understand, the concept would be explained again. Teacher C
preferred to give the learners tests, random questions and worksheets.
Teacher D gave the learners quick quizzes and general questions. “The way they react will
tell you whether they have listened or not”. Teacher D mentioned earlier on: “I look at the use
of plants instead of letting them learn about the morphology of the seed”. In these questions
he responded that if he wanted to assess plant structure he would give the learners a diagram
where they could fill in the labels. When the researcher asked whether he used worksheets or
experiments, he replied: “Yes, but not really experiments, our classes aren’t equipped for
that. We do not have laboratories”. Teacher D stated that he did however demonstrate to the
learners how to form a rainbow with a bucket of water and a mirror, but this was not botany
related.
Teacher E stated that the teacher had to be part of the class and interact with the learners.
She called the learners to her table to let them explain a concept to her: “Especially with our
children, they can’t really write everything down”. She stated that when she marked the
learners’ books she picked up on misconceptions and explained the concept again. Teacher E
63
gave the learners worksheets to complete, class tests and drawings. Teacher E also stated that
the learners did experiments where they observed and then wrote their observations in their
observation books.
Teacher F stated that she loved practicals: “I let them see, touch and smell”. She made use
of a lot of repetition and revision. Learners had to write paragraphs in their own words. She
stimulated learners by giving a comprehension test about plants in an exam. Teacher F stated
that formative assessment tasks were marked during each lesson. She mentioned that the
learners also made posters in class and then had to report back to the class on what they did.
Teachers A to F all preferred to use repetition as a strategy to ensure understanding in
learners. The teachers used formative, summative and continuous assessment tasks which
included comprehensions, drawings, observations, worksheets and quizzes. The teachers
mainly used these methods to identify misconceptions and analyse learner understanding.
Technology integration in the botany class
Teachers A and B were from the same school. The school was situated in a good
neighbourhood and was known as a well-resourced school with various resources available
and additional help such as homework tutors. However, Teachers A and B both did not
integrate technology into their teaching, because of a lack of availability of communication
technology. Teacher A stated that technology would be implemented in the near future and
that she was looking forward to it. The researcher asked whether Teacher A used any other
form of technology in the botany classroom, and she responded: “Yes, well pictures aren’t
really technology, but yes there are videos available”. Teacher A added that the television at
home was a resource, even though it wasn’t literally used in class.
Teacher B stated that they did not have any form of electronic technology available at
school, for example digital projectors. She added: “Discipline is a crisis, you can’t really do
group work or practicals anymore”. Teacher B mentioned that a system was demonstrated at
their school where an experiment could be projected on the whiteboard whilst the teacher
dissected a plant, but stated that there was no funding for systems like that. The researcher
asked whether Teacher B used a digital or overhead projector when teaching, and she
responded: “My class is very bright, so I don’t really use it. So I draw on the board, show
them posters, you know, practical stuff... that’s the best that I can do”.
64
Teachers C and D taught at the same school. The school was known as a medium- to well-
resourced school, with resources available, but not as good as in school A. Teacher C did
not use technology with botany teaching, because, according to Teacher C, it was difficult to
obtain general information about botany concepts from the internet. Teacher C mentioned:
“As for example volcanoes, you get a lot of information, yes!” Teacher C was asked whether
she used any other form of technology in class, like showing Power Point presentations on
the digital projector. She laughed and said: “No! Not anything yet, it depends on availability
and content of the syllabus”. Teacher D added that he did not integrate technology when
teaching botany, he rather showed the learners pictures or photos, but he liked to use his
overhead projector and showed the learners a DVD on “God’s wonders” that was related to
plants.
Teachers E and F taught at a school reported to be poorly resourced and situated in a poor
area, but Teacher F mentioned that she had a lot of apparatus in her class. Teacher E, a
younger teacher, responded to the question: “Yes, definitely, not in my class, but I will take
the learners to the media centre”. She stated that she showed the learners how seed growth
occurs by using a PowerPoint presentation on her laptop, where she connected it to the
television. She added that the learners enjoyed it: “Our generation is very visually oriented,
they don’t listen, but when the learners watch they do better than when you stand in front of
the class trying to explain”. Teacher F stated: “I use the old overhead projector with
transparencies”. She added that the school had DVDs available in the media centre, but that
it created organisational problems: “and they stole our television...[laughs]”. Teacher F, in
contrast to Teacher E, added that the learners did not want to sit still and watch videos, she
obtained images from the internet and tried to show them these pictures from her laptop.
When the researcher asked whether Teacher F thought there was a shortage of resources at
her school, she responded: “Yes, and money, we can’t afford it, I would love to have that”
(resources).
It was clear that it was difficult for schools to incorporate a variety of technology based
teaching strategies into the class. A lack of funding and resources seem to be an issue in all
schools. However, all the schools have media centre facilities, but the teachers prefer not to
deviate from the traditional teaching, because of “extra arrangements” that have to be made.
Teachers think that showing learners pictures and writing on the board serve as technology
integration in class.
65
Sub-research question 3: How do teachers’ attitudes towards botany teaching impact their
botany PCK?
Theme 5: The relationship between teachers’ attitudes and PCK.
According to this study’s theoretical framework, a teacher’s attitude could influence the
teacher’s PCK and PCK could in turn influence a teacher’s attitude towards a Learning Area
or subjects. Teacher attitudes could also influence a teacher’s ways of teaching within the
Learning Area, such as the subject of botany in the Natural Sciences Learning Area.
All teachers replied that there was a positive relationship between a teacher’s attitude and the
teacher’s PCK, but with different explanations. The term “PCK” was used and explained to
each teacher at the beginning of each interview. Most of the teachers did not answer the
question regarding PCK, they avoided talking about PCK and rather mentioned how the
learners enjoyed a Learning Area if the teacher also enjoyed the subject.
Teacher A stated: “If you love what you are teaching, then the learners will love what you are
teaching”. She also added that if you as a teacher were motivated, it would be fun to teach,
but if you did not have content knowledge of the Learning Area, the learners would not like
your subject.
Teacher B stated: “Yes, I say that I won’t be able to teach a Learning Area that I don’t enjoy.
Your attitude towards a Learning Area will have an effect on what the children’s’ attitude
will be”. She added that you had to actively involve the learners. “I also keep sweets in my
class, so I will ask a question and say if they know the answer they can eat it in the class”.
Teacher C stated that a teacher’s attitude and enthusiasm had an influence on the learners
and that the teachers also had to have adequate subject knowledge, pedagogical knowledge,
and love for the subject. “I had to teach a Learning Area that I didn’t know anything about, it
was very difficult, you have to teach the Learning Area that you like, but it doesn’t always
work like that”. She added that the learners would pick up the teacher’s love for the Learning
Area.
Teacher D taught Economical and Management Sciences five years ago: “I didn’t understand
it, so I gave the learners the answers. I didn’t like it or did not want to learn about it. You and
your attitude will be carried across, even though you try, they pick it up. They know
absolutely”.
66
Teacher E stated: “If you don’t like it, you won’t do a lot of research and remember it. If you
are in to it, then you make it more interesting, because it is interesting to you”. This teacher
did however relate to PCK by referring to the teachers’ knowledge of the subject, by
expanding this knowledge by doing extra research, and trying to make the topic of teaching
interesting by using different teaching strategies.
Teacher F stated: “If you aren’t positive, the learners won’t be, but with plants as well. You
have to be practical; you have to know the learners”. She added that that was what she liked
about the Learning Area, she also mentioned that teaching was acting and that you had to
prepare. “Luckily with my experience, I am always prepared”.
4.2.2 Observational data
The following section is a discussion based on the different teachers’ botany classes that were
observed. A narrative discussion will be provided of each teacher’s lesson, by relating to the
researcher’s reflexive field notes. The class observations validate the teachers’ interview
responses in a way of verifying the teachers’ responses and whether the teachers’ responses
were reflected in their teaching. The following research questions will be answered in this
section:
Sub-research question 2: What PCK do Natural Sciences teachers use to teach botany in
their classrooms and why do the teachers use these methods?
Sub-research question 3: How do teachers’ attitudes towards botany teaching impact a
teacher’s botany PCK?
Teacher A
Teacher A’s lesson topic was “Plants in the ecosystem”, taught to a Grade 4 class.
Teacher A’s class only had a few botany-related posters displayed on the walls together with
posters of animals, some posters displayed photos of animals. The live plants in the class
included the teacher’s pot plant on her table for decoration purposes. She also had bean seeds
available to hand to the learners during her lesson. This teacher seemed to be strict and
organised in her class by being in control, but also allowed interaction in class.
67
Teacher A started the lesson by asking the learners questions about plants in general, the uses
of plants and what plants need to grow. The learners co-operated by answering the
questions. The teacher then told the learners about photosynthesis in general The learners
knew what the process was about when she asked questions to the class. The teacher referred
to the plant making “food”. She also talked about the reasons why humans need plants; she
showed the learners three posters: one poster showed different plants, another poster showed
weeds, and a third poster showed vegetables. Learners had to distinguish between useful
plants and harmful plants while she held each poster in front of the class. The teacher also
briefly explained why the plants on the one poster were harmful. Learners asked questions
throughout the lesson. The teacher limited the questions to show the learners the bean seeds.
She also told the learners that the bean seed would grow into a useful plant. The learners
looked at the bean seeds, some learners referred to the seeds as “baked beans”. The teacher
told the learners to take two seeds and plant them at home in cotton wool and water them
when they felt dry.
The teacher told them to bring their plants to school in two weeks’ time. Teacher A had to
explain again what the learners needed to do with the bean seed. The learners then had to
complete an informal assessment in their workbooks, which consisted of the completion of a
word bank on useful and harmful plants.
Teacher B:
Teacher B taught Grade 7s Her topic of study was “Gymnosperms”. Teacher B’s classroom
was a science laboratory with laboratory desks and chairs at the front of the class. There
were basins and laboratory equipment at the back of the classroom. The basins and the
laboratory equipment were not utilised. The back of the class served as a type of storeroom,
where the basins were filled with unused posters. The classroom was very colourful. There
was only one flower poster on the back wall whereas an abundance of animal posters
dominated the walls of this classroom. There were no examples of plants in the class for
example plant growth demonstrations, such as the growth stages of bean plants on display.
The teacher had examples of dried pines and leaves on her table.
This teacher was very comfortable with the learners and her teaching. She talked freely to
the learners and shared jokes with them. The teacher only then started the lesson by checking
the learners’ homework from the previous day and marking as the learners gave the answers.
As a learner put up his hand to answer a question, the teacher just said “no” if incorrect and
68
went on to the next learner’s answer without providing the correct answer. The teacher
started to talk about amber and mentioned interesting facts about amber. She asked the
learners what they thought “amber” was and what it could be used for. She explained to the
learners that gymnasts use the powder to give them better grip on apparatus. When the
teacher talked about amber, she related the function of amber to human functions; to “heal
and repair”.
She also explained to the learners that pine trees had amber and gave them some examples of
gymnosperms by writing on the board, for example pine trees. As the teacher talked about
pine trees, the learners took down notes in their books. There were questions and answer
sessions throughout the lesson. The teacher then held up examples of pines and leaves where
she elaborated on the structure, but she did not circulate the examples in the class. When the
teacher talked about different Gymnosperms and the learners asked for the spelling of
Welwitchia mirabilis, the teacher told them to look up the spelling in their textbooks, but did
not give it to them. A worksheet was provided to be completed by the learners on the topic of
Gymnosperms. The learners asked a lot of questions and the teacher answered as well as she
could. This teacher however limited the number of questions asked, because the learners still
had to complete their work.
Teacher C:
Teacher C’s topic of study with her Grade 7 class was “Ferns ”. Teacher C had a few botany
posters in her class, but Teacher C was also an Afrikaans language and Social Science
teacher. She had more Afrikaans posters on the classroom walls. She had a pot plant on her
table with examples of fresh fern leaves to show to the learners. There were no plants related
to curriculum content on display. It seemed Teacher C had a lot of experience in teaching.
She was very relaxed, in control and very strict in her class, because the class was well-
mannered and she had a firm way of addressing the class. Although it was obvious that this
was an arranged lesson where the learners were briefed about the observation, they sat in
groups and co-operated by participating as Teacher C asked questions.
The teacher started her lesson by referring to the learners’ worksheets on ferns. She started by
telling the learners about the origin of ferns and that they existed in the dinosaur era. The
learners seemed to enjoy talking about dinosaurs, because some of the learners asked
questions about this era with reference to other prehistoric organisms such as cockroaches
and crocodiles. The teacher answered the questions but then started to talk about the ferns’
69
habitat and referred to a habitat as a home. This anthropomorphism made the concept easier
to understand. She asked if the learners had seen “this plant” before by showing one of the
leaves to them. She asked whether they had seen it in their gardens and told the learners
where ferns “like to live”. Learners co-operated by saying that they had seen it before.
Question and answer sessions occurred throughout the lesson as the teacher showed them the
leaves. The teacher then handed each group a fresh fern leaf. The learners were excited to
look at it, because of the involvement in each group. The teacher then talked about the
morphology of the fern leaf and showed them the different parts while they were looking at
it. She then told the learners that the whole structure was a leaf that consisted of smaller
leaflets called “pinnae”. She showed them the sori underneath and stated the function which
is reproduction. The learners were fascinated by the sori and the function and could not
believe that a plant can reproduce by means of the spores inside the sori. The teacher allowed
the learners to look at the leaf structure for a few minutes. Some learners asked questions, and
struggled to see the frond as the leaf. The teacher answered the questions by showing the
class the fern leaf again and using her leaf to explain while they were watching . She asked if
there were any more questions. The learners then had to complete an activity on their
worksheets together with a drawing of a fern leaf. The teacher advised the learners to look at
their real example and to draw what they saw by using the labels on the worksheet. She also
asked the learners to each take a pinna and paste it in their books with Sellotape that she
provided.
Teacher D:
Teacher D’s topic of study was “plant habitats”. He taught Grade 4 learners. Teacher D had
a variety of decorations in his class. He had botany- and zoology-related posters, a lot of
religious and inspirational posters together with mathematics posters, because he also taught
mathematics. This was also a planned lesson, because the Grade 4 learners were supposed to
do botany in the first quarter. He did not make use of any plant examples in class. The teacher
mentioned in the interview that he did not follow a lesson plan or schedule and the lesson
also seemed disorganised.
Teacher D was very relaxed and liked to sit on his table and talk to the learners. His way of
teaching was to tell the learners stories. He eased them into the lesson by asking them; “what
is a home”. The learners co-operated by answering. He then told the learners that a “habitat
is an animal’s home”. Then he asked them to recall examples of living and dead animals.
70
Learners’ hands went up and they provided examples. One child answered that plants were
dead, but the teacher corrected him and said that plants also lived by referring to the
characteristics of life. The teacher then again talked about habitats, but told the learners about
the habitat of plants and explained “hydrophytes, mesophytes and xerophytes”. The teacher
told the learners to look at their worksheets in their books, where there were examples of
these hydrophytes, mesophytes and xerophytes. Some learners did not co-operate and sat and
talked. He only referred to the examples on the worksheets and started to relate hydrophytes
to “animals such as fish that only live in water”. The teacher started to talk about animal
habitats and eventually started to talk about Christianity. The learners were very curious
about different animal habitats and a question and answer session followed. The teacher tried
to return to the topic of plant habitats, and therefore told the learners to complete the activity
on their worksheets for the rest of the period. There was a lack of time, because the teacher
talked about different topics and stories such as Christianity, therefore the learners did not
finish the work in class.
Teacher E:
Teacher E’s topic of study for her Grade 4 lesson was “Useful plants and germination”.
Teacher E had an enormous classroom, the size of a laboratory, but no science equipment.
There was an abundance of animal and decorative posters such as pretty flowers on the walls
and a pot plant on her table.
The teacher started her lesson by adding to learners’ prior knowledge in talking about “useful
plants”. She told the learners that vegetables were useful plants and asked them to give
examples of vegetables. The learners co-operated. . Then Teacher E started to talk about
germination. She asked the learners what germination was and she waited for an answer.
One learner put up her hand and answered: “it is when something grows”. The teacher
nodded and then explained the process of germination to the learners. She explained the
process again and then asked the learners questions to make sure they understood
germination. The teacher used a poster that showed vegetables. She showed it to the learners
and asked the learners to choose their favourite vegetable. She referred to the bean and maize
seed, told the learners they were useful plants and then asked the learners why they were
useful. The teacher held up the poster and pointed to different vegetables to let the learners
name the different types. The learners co-operated.
71
The teacher then told the learners to bring a bean and cotton wool to class in a week’s time.
She briefly explained what they would do with the bean seed. The learners asked a lot of
questions, but Teacher E limited the questions because of a lack of time. She rushed the
lesson to let the learners complete their worksheets. She told the learners to start working on
their worksheets: as the teacher held up the poster, the learners had to fill in a graph. She
started the class activity by asking “Who likes potatoes?” Five of the learners liked potatoes
and the class had to colour five units on their graphs. The learners completed the worksheet,
but most learners struggled so Teacher E went to their desks and helped them with the graph.
4.2.3 Lesson plan data
In the following section a description of each teacher’s lesson plan is given, summarised in
table format. A number of five lesson plans were collected. Three of the five documents were
fully completed lesson plans, filled out in accordance with the school’s format. The rest of
the documents consisted of notes handed to learners in class from which the teachers taught
the lesson. These lesson plans were based on the following theme and sub-research question:
Teaching strategies and PCK towards botany teaching, sub-research question 2; What PCK
do Natural Sciences teachers use to teach botany in their classrooms and why do teachers
choose these methods? Sub-research question 3 also plays a role here. Tables 10 to 14 show
the content of each teacher’s lesson plan which were used to teach the observed botany
lessons. The lesson plan documents will be discussed in the section Discussion of the data.
72
Table 10: Teacher A, lesson plan A. A complete lesson plan.
Date of the
lesson
Topic of the
lesson
Strand/theme and
context of the
lesson
Learning
Outcomes
Assessment
Standards
Learning Area
integration
Resources used
during the lesson
The lesson
structure
Learner
activities during
or after the
lesson
January 2012 Grade 4; plants in
the ecosystem
Life and living:
Life processes and
healthy living
Interaction in the
environment
LO 1.1.1 Planning
investigations and
collecting data
LO 1.1.2 Do the
investigation
LO 1.1.3
Evaluating and
communicating
findings
LO 2.2.1
Remembering
useful information
Observation and
comparison
Interpreting
information
Predicting
Planning a
scientific
investigation
Communicating
scientific
information
Languages Black Board
Own experience
Practical
examples such as
beans
Textbook
Connection with
prior knowledge:
Animals and
humans eat plants
General knowledge
about plants
Core knowledge:
Plants produce their
own food
Use of plants
Different plants-
useful and harmful
What do plants
need?
Intervention:
Plant and grow your
own seed
Informal
assessment
73
Table 11: Teacher B, lesson plan B. A complete lesson plan.
Date of
the
lesson
Topic of the
lesson
Strand/theme and
context of the
lesson
Learning
Outcomes
Assessment
Standards
Learning
Area
integration
Resources used
during the lesson
The lesson structure Learner activities
during or after the
lesson
July to
August
2012
Grade 7;
Gymnosperms
Life and living:
Life processes and
healthy living
Interaction in the
environment
Biodiversity
change and
continuity
LO 2.2.2:
Categorise
information
LO 2.2.3:
Interpretation of
information
Assessment and
comparison
Taking notes
Sort and classify
Interpret
information
Communicating
scientific
information
Languages
Social science
Textbook,
“to show learners
examples of plants
help them understand
and remember”
Connection with prior
knowledge
The structure of ferns
Core knowledge:
Examples; pine tree,
yellowwood, cycad.
Male cones and female
cones.
Bark protects against fire
and disease.
Tree secretes tree sap to
protect against insects,
gives off odour and heals
wounds
Learners take notes
during the lesson
Examples of plants
are studied
Completion of a
worksheet and
drawings of male and
female cones
74
Table 12: Teacher C, lesson plan C. A summary of the learner handout.
Teachers C and D did not submit lesson plans, but a page from the handouts used in class from the schools’ system of worksheets called “Smart”. Smart is a programme that
is used by the school to teach from. No textbooks are used in this school, but the copies of worksheets and text from Smart (Smart education solutions, 2012).
Topic Lesson Learning Outcomes
Grade 7: Ferns Ferns are older than some terrestrial animals
and older than dinosaurs.
There are 9500 different fern species in the
world.
Habitat: tropical areas, warm and moist.
Morphology: leaf like stem called the fern
leaf.
Small leaflets with sori producing spores for
reproduction.
Leaf stem is called the rachis and
the fern has an underground stem growing
horizontally.
Diagram of the external structure of the fern
and the pinna.
Activity: draw the external structure of the
fern plant, match column A
with column B.
LO 1: Construction of scientific knowledge
75
Table 13: Teacher D, lesson plan D. A summary of the learner handouts.
Topic Lesson Prior knowledge
Grade 4: Plant habitats Definition of habitat: natural environment
where plants and animals live and spend most
of their time.
Different habitats:
Hydrophytes are plants living in water such
as ponds, rivers and lakes.
Mesophytes are plants living in a habitat with
adequate water supply.
Xerophytes are plants living in dry habitats
such as a dessert.
Diagram/ activity includes a picture of a
dessert habitat, water habitat and terrestrial
habitat, learners had to match the habitats
with pictures of a cactus, water plant and
terrestrial plant.
Living and non-living organisms.
Non-living: sun, clouds, water, soil, rock, air,
house.
Living: trees, grass, flowers, fish, bird, cat,
butterfly, frog.
Living organisms respire, move, reproduce,
grow and eat food
76
Table 14: Teacher E, lesson plan E. A complete lesson plan.
Date Topic Learning Outcomes Assessment Standards Lesson Resources
February 2012 Grade 4: Useful plants and
germination
LO 2 ASS 1,2 Prior knowledge:
Useful plants.
Find out if they know what
germination is.
Introduction:
Different useful plants with
examples.
Ask learners what their
favourite vegetables are and
fill this in on a graph.
Learners should bring cotton
wool and a bean seed to do
experiment on germination.
Activities:
Complete and paste
worksheets on useful plants.
Paste and complete blocks on
graph.
Formal assessment with
rubric.
Magazines, workbooks,
posters, cotton wool and
beans.
77
Teachers A and B presented lesson plan documents set up by the school, where the teacher
only had to fill in the information. The topic of Teacher A’s lesson was stated as Plants in
the ecosystem. The lesson plan contained the Learning Outcomes and Assessment Standards
for this lesson, and also Learning Area integration. The lesson plan included how this
particular lesson connected to prior lessons and learners’ prior knowledge. Teacher A’s
observed lesson was a general lesson on plants, where the teacher talked about the
importance of plants, photosynthesis, and harmful and beneficial plants. She also handed the
learners bean seeds to be grown at home and not in class. The core of this lesson correlated
with the information on the lesson plan, but with less information stated on the lesson plan
and lack of detail.
As stated in the lesson plan, the resources used by the teacher were the black board, own
experience, practical examples and the textbook with no textbook number. In the observation
the teacher only used a poster to show different vegetables to the learners. As stated in the
lesson plan this teacher only had a discussion with the class and gave them an informal
activity to do in class on harmful and beneficial plants. Learners did not read from their
textbooks.
Teacher B stated in her lesson plan that she used various examples of plants and that the
learners took notes as the lesson commenced, also that the learners studied the parts of the
plants as they were circulating in the class. Teacher B stated in her interview that learners
learn better when they see the physical plant; she also stated this in the lesson plan. She did,
however, state that the only resource used was the Grade 7 textbook, although she did not use
it in class, but only referred to it to look up the spelling of a plant’s name. This lesson was a
discussion without using a textbook. Teacher B did not state that the real plants were
examples of resources used in class.
Teachers C and D did not make use of structured lesson plans. When asked for a copy of their
lesson plans, the teachers provided a copy of the Smart worksheet that the learners pasted in
their books. During Teacher C’s lesson on ferns, she read from the worksheet and discussed it
with the learners. As she discussed it she referred to the physical fern leaf as an example,
where all learners were sitting in groups and studied the leaf, thereafter the learners
completed a short activity on the worksheet. The worksheet provided stated one Learning
Outcome that had to be reached at the end of the lesson, i.e. the Construction of Scientific
78
Knowledge. This lesson did not state the Assessment Standards and resources used, although
the physical plant was used in class.
Teacher D’s lesson was more of a discussion around plant habitats, where he talked to the
learners and referred to their notes. This lesson was also taught form the school’s Smart
learning programme, but this worksheet did not state the Learning Outcomes, Assessment
Standards, core knowledge or resources.
Teachers E and F were interviewed, but only Teacher E’s lesson was observed. Teacher E
provided a lesson plan copy of her observed lesson. As mentioned before, Teacher F refused
to take part in the observations. Due the ethical principle of voluntary participation, no
observation was made in her classroom.
Teacher E had a structured lesson plan set up by the school which stated all relevant
information such as the term, the week, the date started and completed and also the theme
and topic of the lesson. Learning Outcomes and Assessment Standards and the learner
activities were provided. The teacher stated that she referred to the learners’ prior knowledge
on germination. This lesson format was exactly as the lesson was presented in class, but
magazines, worksheets, posters, cotton wool and beans were listed as resources to be used
during the lesson. However, during the lesson only a poster was used. Learners were asked to
bring beans and cotton wool to school for the next lesson.
4.3 Summary of the data
In the following section a summary is given of the data generated from the teachers’
interviews, class observations and lesson plans. The data is summarised as narratives with
reference to the research questions in this study. Data from the teachers’ interviews and class
observations are summarised collectively and data from the lesson plan documents are
summarised towards the end of this section.
4.3.1 Teachers’ interviews and class observations
Science teachers’ attitudes towards and PCK of botany teaching can be formed by different
factors. Teachers’ attitudes can be influenced by plant blindness, by their knowledge and
conceptions of botany with regard to their teaching and the curriculum as their guideline, and
also by the factor of enjoying botany, and their past training in botany. Teachers’ PCK
towards botany can in turn be influenced by their use of a variety of teaching strategies,
79
practical examples, awareness of learners’ understanding, assessment strategies and the
teachers’ botanical content knowledge.
Sub-research question 1: What are Grades 4 to 7 Natural Sciences teachers’ attitudes
towards botany teaching and why do teachers harbour these particular attitudes?
Despite the importance of science education in every school and with the emphasis on
environmental awareness, there seems to be negativity towards botany in Natural Sciences
classes regarding botany teaching and learning among teachers and learners. During the
interviews, teachers were asked to state their preferences when teaching Natural Sciences.
Two out of the six interviewed teachers admitted that they preferred not to teach botany,
because the teachers found it “boring”. The teachers admitted that they did not enjoy
teaching botany. Statements such as “you see plants all the time, it is not something different”
and that you could not “touch plants like you do with animals” were prominent during the
interviews. One of the teacher’s responses “seeing plants all the time” could be interpreted in
a different light, since teachers “see plants all the time”, but do they really see them ?
Plant blindness
Wandersee and Schussler (1998) refer to plant blindness as “the inability to see or notice the
plants in one’s own environment”, which could be inferred as the failure to see the
importance of plants in the environment, the lack of appreciation of plants, and
zoochauvinism. Plant blindness could be associated with the following indicators;
overlooking plants in the environment, thinking of plants to only blend in with the
environment, misunderstanding of plants, not having dealt with plants in a practical manner
and failure to carry the functioning of plants across (Balick & Cox, 1996; Wandersee &
Schussler, 1999). Plant blindness seemed to be a prominent factor among the teachers in this
study. The teachers preferred to teach about animals or any other concept in Natural Sciences,
except botany. At the same time the teachers in this study acknowledged the importance of
plants, but did not really see the plants around them. If teachers do not see plants the learners
will also show plant blindness.
Often little attention is given to and little appreciation is shown towards plants and learners
and teachers have the propensity to harbour negativity towards plants and botany, which
leads to plant blindness (Wandersee & Schussler, 1998). Negativity towards botany held by
teachers and learners may be caused by teachers who spend too little time on educating
80
learners about plants and their role in the environment (Schussler & Olzak, 2008). In this
study it was clear that teachers would rather teach zoological concepts in class because
learners related better to animals than to plants.
Zoochauvinism
Zoochauvinism is a factor that influenced teachers’ attitudes in this study. Teachers stated
that they were more affectionate towards animals than towards plants and that learners
preferred to learn about animals rather than about plants. Teacher C stated that she preferred
to teach about plants, animals and the human body, but later in the interview stated that she
preferred to teach about the human body, because the learners found it more interesting.
Zoochauvinism can lead to plant blindness in science education where teachers are
acquainted with the crucial role plants play in our environment, but do not emphasise the
importance in the classroom (Uno, 2009). The reason for this situation might be the teachers’
negative attitudes towards botany teaching, which in turn can be carried across to the
learners, which can lead to a decline in interest and negative attitudes toward botany as
learners grow older.
Teachers prefer to teach about animals because it does not require the use of interesting
teaching strategies, because the learners are already interested (Honey, 1987). In this study
teachers preferred zoology above botany because learners related to animals and not to
plants, because of animals’ emotion. Not only did the learners show zoochauvinism, but the
teachers also showed zoochauvinism. Teachers in this study found botany teaching more
difficult than teaching zoology; therefore they expressed a preference for zoology. Teacher
A found botany difficult, because the learners found animals more interesting and because
the learners saw plants as “dead things”. Three out of the six teachers (Teachers A, C and E)
stated that botany was more difficult to teach and learn than zoology. Teachers also stated
that when teachers struggled with a subject and its content, they did not like to spend time
on that subject because the subject was difficult to teach. As one of the teachers (Teacher D)
stated, he had to teach a subject that he did not like. Consequently this teacher gave the
learners the answers to the questions in class activities, rather than spending time teaching the
subject.
81
Botany content in the Natural Science curriculum
Despite the vast number of concepts in the Natural Sciences Learning Area that range from
different themes such as Life and Living to Energy and Change, botany is underrepresented
in the Natural Sciences curriculum and is integrated with other areas, as can be seen in
Table 15, page 81. Botany-related Core Knowledge and principles that are present in this
curriculum are listed. Botany-related content in the Natural Sciences curriculum consists of
photosynthesis, reproduction in plants and exotic species. Other botany-related areas include
plants in the ecosystem, plants’ relationship to animals, soil, fossils, food webs, pollution,
global warming and the water cycle. All these areas pertain to botany, but are dealt with in
relation to other non-botanical concepts. Plants are described as part of the surroundings and
not as key concepts when these botany-related subjects are taught.
Table 15: Core Knowledge related to botany in the Life and Living, Earth and Beyond,
Energy and Change, Matter and Material themes in the Natural Sciences Learning Area
(DoE, 2003).
Theme Botany-related Core Knowledge and
principles in the Intermediate phase
(Grades 4 to 6)
Botany-related Core
Knowledge and principles in
the Senior phase (Grade 7)
Life and
Living
Photosynthesis, asexual and sexual
reproduction of plants, the role of plants
in the ecosystem, the interrelation
between animals and plants, soil
formation with reference to plants,
fossil studies and the relationship to
plants.
Photosynthesis, ecosystems, food
webs, pollution, recycling, exotic
species, biodiversity, cells.
Earth and
Beyond
Soil erosion, soil formation (related to
humus), the water cycle.
The sun as energy source, the
way in which plants adapt to
different climates, global
warming, continental drift,
fossils.
Energy and
Change
Energy sources such as the sun
(photosynthesis).
Fossil fuels, energy from
ecosystems, environmental
studies.
82
Matter and
Material
No related material. Natural resources and
exploitation thereof.
Teachers in this study felt that botany was neglected in our curriculum. They felt there was
little emphasis on botany a lack of time to teach botany, and that it was difficult to teach
botany, and therefore they sometimes omitted botany-related sections. Teachers stated that
zoology and other concepts were dealt with in more detail in the current curriculum and that
botany was just “touched upon”. Teacher F also stated that botany was integrated into other
themes and not given in detail in this curriculum.
Teacher A referred to the current curriculum (RNCS) when she mentioned that the previous
curriculum (NCS) had more detail on botany-related concepts than the current curriculum.
Teacher E on the other hand stated that the RNCS placed enough emphasis on botany. When
asked to compare the number of botany concepts to zoology concepts Teacher E mentioned
that animals in the curriculum took up most of the time. She explained that her teaching
about the habitat, different mammals, reptiles, birds and reproduction in the first and second
quarters took up half of the Grade 4 year.
Teacher F, being a more experienced teacher, stated that she added information to her lessons
from previous curricula, the current curriculum lacked relevant information on botany.
Textbooks based on the curriculum contained a large amount of information and normally in
science textbooks there was a myriad of interesting and fascinating images and information
on animals and humans when compared to the paucity of botany information (Tolman, et al.,
1998; Schussler, et al., 2010). Even though Teacher F did not make use of textbooks, but of
worksheets, a lack of information on botany could be the precursor to negative views
towards botany teaching and learning in the classroom. Teacher F admitted that she
sometimes omitted botany-related content, because of the lack of time. International research
stated that teachers “eased botany out of the syllabus because it bored their students”
(Bernardt, 1999 in Wandersee et al., 2006). During this study it became clear that the same
was happening in the South African context.
Botany can also be neglected because of uninteresting teaching strategies used in class
(Hershey, 1996). Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) plays a role in teaching botany.
Teacher A for example found that she struggled to teach difficult concepts that the RNCS
required her to teach. She stated that the first section of the Grade 4 Natural Sciences
83
curriculum was botany, that learners were confronted with difficult botany-related
terminology and therefore the learners had a negative association with the subject. Difficult
concepts were avoided by the teacher and the teacher did not stimulate the learners to enjoy
botany.
Lack of time to teach botany and difficulty of teaching botany seem to be prominent
problems in Natural Sciences classes. A lack of botanical relevance to teachers’ and learners’
lives and the fading of botany in the curriculum can also be reasons for the harboured
negative attitudes (Hershey, 1996).
The influence of past teacher training in botany on botany teaching
It is the personal opinion of the researcher that learners find the teaching of botany very
negative and learners refer to it as “boring”. It is not different when you ask Natural Sciences
teachers to give their views on botany and how they experienced it in their past training.
Even though three of the teachers (Teachers D, E and F) did not receive botany training, they
showed zoochauvinism when asked how they experienced botany in their current teaching
practice. Teacher E commented: “I don’t like the plant thing, it’s boring”. This comment is
synonymous with negativity towards botany.
The other three interviewed teachers (Teachers A, B and C) received general training in
botany during their college or university careers. They were Natural Sciences teachers and
taught Natural Sciences with botany. On the other hand Teacher D was a history teacher,
Teacher E was an English language teacher and Teacher F an art teacher and all of them
taught in the Learning Area of Natural Sciences. The teachers who received past training in
botany (Teachers A, B and C) all showed zoochauvinism. They all preferred animals to
plants, and because animals had human characteristics they found it is easier to relate to
animals, which made it easier for them to teach zoology.
One of the teachers (Teacher A) found botany difficult during her training. Teachers A, B
and C stated the importance of a teacher when botany is taught. They stated that the teacher
should be the one who “makes it interesting”. One of the teachers also referred to having a
“wonderful teacher” and the other mentioned interesting excursions.
It is evident that all the teachers remembered the way that they were taught themselves.
They referred to their own learning experiences and demonstrated that they experienced
these teaching strategies (teaching of the topic) as important. These prior experiences helped
84
to form their attitudes towards a topic. Even though all the teachers stated that a good teacher
made botany interesting, they still harboured negative attitudes towards botany and showed
zoochauvinism. Past experiences, such as the teaching strategies used to teach these teachers
botany during their training and content knowledge can impact teacher attitudes towards
botany and the teaching thereof. Consequently the notion exists that teachers prefer zoology
above botany, therefore the teachers’ prior knowledge, content knowledge and teaching
strategies related to botany seem to be insufficient (Honey, 1987).
Sub-research question 2: What PCK do Natural Sciences teachers use to teach botany in
their classes and why do teachers choose these methods?
The following section discusses the PCK that Natural Sciences teachers use when teaching
botany. The discussion is based on the teacher interview and class observation findings. The
findings will be discussed under the following headings; teaching strategies used in botany
teaching, the importance of teaching strategies when teaching botany, teacher awareness of
learner understanding and assessment.
Teaching strategies used in botany teaching
During the interviews all teachers stated the types of teaching strategy they use when
teaching botany, such as practical examples, associations, videos, pictures, the use of
textbooks, narratives (telling stories), posters and practicals. During the class observations
most of the teachers did not make use of the teaching strategies they mentioned.
Only Teachers B and C used practical examples in their classes. All the other teachers
mainly used the transmission method as a teaching strategy in the botany class. The teachers
did not take their learners outside to teach them about plants in the school garden where they
could see real plants. Teachers A and F complained about the time constraint and the lack
of discipline among learners. Where this was a constraint some of the teachers (Teachers B
and C) brought the plants into their classes, but one teacher (Teacher B) failed to send the
examples around in the class for observation by learners. One teacher (Teacher D) did not
like to have real plants in his classroom because he felt it was being cruel to the plant and he
did not want soil in his class. Teachers did not want to use the practical examples in a
lesson. They rather used posters or pictures or just taught from the textbook and talked to
the learners. The way in which a subject is carried across has a big influence on learner
attitudes and understanding. Teachers’ teaching strategies are very important in teaching
85
botany. Without good teaching strategies learners may see botany as an uninteresting and dull
subject which is also not pertinent to their lives, resulting in growing disinterested attitudes as
their age increases (Ramsden, 1998; Prokop et al., 2007). Teachers’ teaching strategies and
methods might result in acculturation, leading to learners harbouring the same perceptions,
misconceptions and attitudes towards botany as teachers (Roth, 2001; Schussler et al., 2010).
Technology integration in the botany class
The use of technology in classes, especially in botany classes is still lacking, mainly because
of a lack of resources in various schools with different resource availability. Technology in
class includes the use of overhead projectors, digital projectors with videos and slideshows
and internet integration during the lesson. One international study showed that when it was
impossible to use real plants in the classroom, technology could be integrated as a substitute
(Cherubini, Gash & McClaughlin, 2008).
Only Teachers E and F stated that they integrated technology into their botany classrooms.
This was stated during the interviews, but none of the teachers used technology during their
observed lessons. The reason why the teachers integrated technology into their lessons was
that some learners did not have technology at home, so when it was used during the lesson
the learners were intrigued and wanted to learn about that topic. The majority of the teachers
(Teachers A, B, C and D) were against using technology in the botany class, because of a
lack of funding, “the learners do not want to sit still and watch” and organisational problems .
An organisational problem was that the media centre had to be booked in advance and
taking the class to the media centre wastes valuable teaching time. Another reason for not
using technology in class was that teachers did not want to deviate from their traditional
teaching strategies and would rather be regarded as an “old school teacher”.
Research has shown that the use of technology fascinated learners and kept them interested
and wanting to learn more (Cherubini, Gash & McClaughlin, 2008). Technology can be used,
for example a digital projector, which is connected to a computer or tablet, to show learners a
video on plant growth or even photosynthesis. This can help the learners understand and
remember different botanical concepts.
Teachers stated in the interviews that they “would love to have that”, that is technology, and
that teaching and learning would be improved. Friedrichsen et al. (2009) state that a teacher’s
PCK includes them using technology, live specimens and other media and resources which
86
capture learners’ attention in science and to leave the traditional manner of lecturing behind.
Research has shown that learners’ attitudes towards science already show a decline by the
time they reach middle school grades (McNall Krall, Lott & Wymer, 2009). Therefore
teachers need to involve learners actively in class (Anderson & Smith, 1987; McDermott,
1991; McDermott et al., 2006; McNall Krall & Lott, 2008).
Importance of teaching strategies when teaching botany
Most of the teachers in this study stated that the use of teaching strategies was of the utmost
importance when teaching botany, because it improves learner understanding. The previous
statement is in agreement with the literature. Not only are learners more involved in class
when teachers use a variety of teaching strategies, but hands-on learning and discovery will
also aid in learner understanding (Magnusson et al., 1999).
However, only a few teachers’ responses during the interviews were reflected in their botany
teaching. Teacher E did not know the meaning of a “teaching strategy”. Teachers D, E and F
stated that they used a variety of teaching strategies such as videos, examples such as seeds
and pictures, and their senses while teaching botany, but these teachers’ botany lessons
showed otherwise. Despite the various teacher responses about the importance of teaching
strategies in the botany class, some of these teachers still followed their traditional methods
in teaching, because they did not want to change, try new methods or do something different.
One of the teachers, Teacher D, stated that he did not like to use resources, but then later on
in the interview contradicted his statement by stating that “teaching strategies are important
otherwise it is a dead lesson”. This was however not reflected in his teaching.
Teachers A, B and C also stated the importance of teaching strategies and it was clear during
the observations that they regarded teaching strategies as important for teaching and learning.
Although these teachers used teaching strategies, they did not use a variety of teaching
strategies. The use of posters and the transmission method were the most popular teaching
strategies observed in these teachers’ classes.
In these observed classes the learners enjoyed the lessons presented to them, especially in
Teacher C’s class where she used a real fern frond to teach the lesson. Literature shows that
learners often enjoy the practical part of science classes more than the lecturing part, for the
reason that learners like to be actively involved which helps them to concentrate better on a
specific concept taught in class (Cooper, Hanmer & Cerbin, 2006). As a result of active
87
learning and involvement in class, the learners are interested in the topic, so active learning
helps learners to focus more and they are intrigued by the teachers’ ways of teaching (Bligh,
2000). Primary school teachers are faced with teaching as a challenging task, because most
of the teachers teach a wide variety of Learning Areas. Consequently teachers
compartmentalise their teaching in each Learning Area, because of the complexity thereof,
which leads to a lack of time to make botany teaching and learning interesting (Gess-
Newsome, 1999).
The role of the teacher and assessment
PCK aids in creating awareness among teachers about misconceptions of a specific topic held
by the learners, in this case botany concepts, and enables teachers to use appropriate
pedagogical methods to approach the learners’ requirements in class (Shulman, 1986). Most
teachers used repetition and question and answer sessions to determine whether learners
understood a topic. These are the two prominent methods to ensure understanding of
botanical concepts. One of the teachers stated that she liked to relate plant topics to human
activities, because this helped learners to understand, since learners related more to animals
(and humans) than to plants. Another teacher stated that active involvement of the teacher
was very important. This active involvement of the teacher is part of a teacher’s PCK that is
described in Chick and Harris’ (2007) modified framework of PCK (Table 2, p. 27). Active
involvement encompasses the outcomes of PCK.
Not only is the role of the teacher important in the class when teaching botany, but
assessment of botanical concepts also plays a role to help teachers to identify misconceptions.
Most of the teachers used traditional assessment strategies such as tests, worksheets, exams,
projects to assess botanical work, but practical work still seemed to be lacking. Practical work
was absent during the observed botany lessons and the use of worksheets was more prevalent.
If practical work is omitted in botany classes it can lead to passive learners with negative
attitudes towards botany that seems to be presented and assessed in a dull and uninteresting
manner (Zhongua, 2005 and Schussler et al., 2010).
Teacher F stated that she liked to develop learners’ thinking skills by letting the learners
write paragraphs in their own words, she used comprehension tests of botany concepts in
exams, did revision and let her learners do projects where they had to explain their projects
to the class. Teacher F therefore fits into Magnusson’s et al. (1998) teacher orientations,
where the teacher helps develop thinking skills, tentative thinking, hand-on learning, project
88
based science and discovery to help asses botanical concepts. According to Magnusson
(1998) these orientations are synonymous with PCK. Therefore PCK requires a teacher to
have knowledge of the science curriculum, the outcomes to be achieved, knowledge of
assessment strategies and the way in which teacher performances can be measured
(Friedrichsen et al., 2009).
Sub-research question 3: How do teacher attitudes towards botany teaching impact their
PCK?
All the teachers who participated in this study agreed that a relationship exists between the
teachers’ attitude and the teachers’ PCK. Most of the teachers also referred to the learners
who will be affected by the teachers’ attitudes. Teacher A highlighted that if the teacher was
motivated, he or she would enjoy teaching the Learning Area, but if the teacher was
negative it would have an influence on the way he teaches, and his content knowledge.
Teacher A earlier on stated that learning about plants was not easy and felt that they had to
begin the Grade 4 year with something interesting like animals. Therefore it can be said that
Teacher A had a negative attitude towards botany, because learners were not enjoying the
subject in the Learning Area of Natural Sciences.
Teacher B stated that she would not be able to teach a Learning Area that she did not enjoy.
“Your attitude towards a subject depends on what the children’s’ attitudes will be”. Teacher
B’s expressed the same opinion about botany, but she liked zoology more, because it was
interesting and because she herself had a wonderful teacher. Some teachers also prefer
teaching zoology to teaching botany, because of their learners’ preferences, prior teacher
knowledge and experience as well as their content knowledge and teaching strategies used in
class (Honey, 1987).
Teacher C felt very positive that a “teacher’s attitude and enthusiasm has a direct influence
on the child”. She also stated that she had to teach a Learning Area that she did not like and it
was therefore difficult to teach, whereas teachers do not always have a choice to teach the
Learning Area they like. Teachers then normally transfer their knowledge directly to the
learners in using teacher centred approaches In these classes there is a lack of practical work
(Zhongua, 2005). Teacher C seemed very comfortable with teaching botany. Although she
earlier stated that she found botany more difficult than zoology, she also enjoyed it. Teacher
C also stated that if you did not make botany interesting to the learners you would lose their
interest in that lesson. It could be inferred that teachers showed plant blindness, perhaps
89
because of the lack of living plants as examples in lessons, as a result there will be an absence
of excitement, adventure and enthusiasm among learners towards botany (Hershey, 1996).
Teacher D stated that if the teacher did not like what he was teaching, he would rush
through his lessons. Teacher D also had to teach a Learning Area he did not like and he did
not do anything beyond what was expected of him. When he asked questions he actually gave
the learners the answers, because of his lack of interest and knowledge harboured in that
Learning Area. In any Learning Area the teachers’ teaching strategies might result in
acculturation, leading to learners having the same perceptions and attitudes towards a
Learning Area as the teacher (Roth, 2001; Schussler et al., 2010).
Teacher E stated that a teacher would not do any extra research on a topic if he did not like
what he was teaching. It can be said that curiosity, set goals and encouragement are key
points for education and achievement in botany teaching. If the teacher does not like the
Learning Area, nothing out of the ordinary will be done to make the lesson interesting (Hidi
& Harackiewicz, 2000; Prokop et al., 2007). Earlier on Teacher E stated that she did not like
to teach Natural Sciences and that she did not want to teach the Learning Area in 2013. She
also did not have a choice on what Learning Area to teach and got the Learning Area with the
classroom. She added that “you as teacher will make the Learning Area fun, because you
find it interesting”. However it seemed Teacher E liked to be actively involved in learning,
she liked to take the learners outside to learn more about plants, but she also stated earlier on
that she “does not like the plant thing, it is boring, children don’t find it very interesting, and
because they don’t like it I don’t like it”. Teachers and learners need to be actively involved
in botany teaching and learning, to contribute to the school’s attitude towards botany, relating
to their prior knowledge and their daily lives (Goodwin, 2008; 16).
Teacher F stated that the teacher had to be involved in class, also that teaching was acting
which gives the impression that she enjoyed teaching and that the teacher always had to
prepare. She also stated that a teacher’s negativity could influence learners’ attitudes.
Teaching should therefore not only focus on skills and knowledge, focus should also be
placed on attitudes, aptitudes and problem solving skills (Zhongua, 2005). Teachers are in
control of these actions in class. Teacher F also mentioned something similar to Wood-
Robinson (1991), i.e. that a teacher had to be practical in such a way that class work and
practical work would not be segregated because this may result in misconceptions and
90
negativity towards botany. It would be better to capture the learners’ interest and let them
become involved in practical work by connecting practical work and theory (Cottrell, 2004).
According to the National Research Council (2001), research indicated that teachers play a
vital role in learners’ achievement. The manner in which botany is taught could have a major
impact on learners’ and teachers’ outlook and attitude towards the Learning Area. Teachers’
PCK appears to play an important part in the development of pupils’ attitudes towards